18 March 2011
NYT Paygo No Go
Today I received an e-mail from an Old Grey Lady, otherwise known as The New York Times, proclaiming an important announcement. It was just the 42nd Street fixture again implementing some form of Paywall. I trust that the Old Grey Lady’s attempts to raise revenue will be as effective as the paygo promises made during the era of former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 8th).
Since the advent of the internet, there have been few media outlets that have implemented successful subscription models. The Wall Street Journal charges to see their online news content, and the WSJ has over 400,000 subscribers. Rupert Murdoch’s Times of London implemented a paywall last July which reduced web from 21 million hits to 2 million but managed to retain 100,000 web subscribers along with 100,000 who have access due to their regular subscriptions.
Amongst new media, Rush Limbaugh was amongst the first broadcasters to offer a premium service Rush 24/7 which offers podcasts, watching the radio show on a “Ditto cast”, a “stack of stuff” and a newsletter. It is estimated that Rush 24/7 may be a $5 Million a year revenue stream. Many other conservative broadcasters have followed suit. So much so, Glenn Beck’s Extreme Insider is a nascent network, having a “4th Hour” after-the-show show, specials, Glenn Beck University and another one hour show hosted by S.E. Cupp. This cyber success and the death of the dead tree addition are major motivators for the New York Times to again try a digital subscription effort.
In 2005, the New York Times put up a paywall for their esteemed Columnists like Maureen Dowd. Well, that did not work out so well and the subscription model for the Pinch Sulzberger’s bottom line was dropped in 2007. The Times also has charged for their digital archives. Now the New York Times will try a metered model, which will allow for a score free of articles a month, and five Google references a day before being prompted for a $15 a month subscription. This seems targeted for I-Pad and smart phone readers. It is unclear how Kindle subscriptions will be effected, but Kindle readers have carped that their edition does not include all of the articles.
The reticence from e-book readers suggests the problem that news consumers want to feel like they are getting something for their money. The Wall Street Journal offers outstanding financial news that is not readily replicated elsewhere and appeals to a niche national audience. But the WSJ also operates a free Opinionjournal.com website which shares the editorial page opinions. The Rush 24/7 and Glenn Beck Extreme Insider gains allegiance not only from consumer identification with the broadcaster but because the subscriptions offer material not available elsewhere and consumption on the consumers own terms (e.g. podcasts, archives).
The New York Times has several challenges in charging for their subscriptions. Ironically, the ubiquity of the NYT as a news source in the Lamestream Broadcast newsrooms makes it less likely that casual new consumers will subscribe to delve into the details. Is this digital subscription offering something new or extra?
While the Old Grey Lady’s liberal news sensibility may appeal to Manhattanites and the Eastern Seaboard Elites, will this be enough to build a digital subscription base? After the 2002 campaign by the New York Times to admit women into Augusta National with a steady stream of articles, the NYT’s started to resemble the caricature of just being a liberal organ grinder. The NYT lost further credibility after the Jayson Blair plagiarism scandal. This perception of partisanship and fecklessness was reinforced with their scant and skewed coverage of the Tea Party and Restoring Honor rallies.
The New York Times cultivated an image of through their motto of containing “All the News that Fit to Print.” A quarter century ago, I remember regularly going to my Journalism School’s reading room to thoroughly read one of the few newpapers of record. Now, the proliferation of news sources, the unmasking of liberal Lamestream Media news bias and the advent of alternative media no longer makes the New York Times required reading.
Maybe I can not appreciate the perceived value of a NYT digital subscription as it reporting is on the other side of the ideological aisle. But I still do not think that there are sufficient subscribers at the Alphabet News Networks, Tweed types trapped in ivory towers and Manhattanites to make this metered model be a steady income stream.
New source subscription schemes only seem to work if they offer added value for money and/or subscribers identify with their news source. The WSJ offers information which is unique amongst publications. Rush 24/7 and Beck’s Extreme Insider offer significant extra content and services and subscribers are validated by their membership. I am dubious that the NYT’s digital subscription will give that much more or have the cache that the aforementioned memberships have. It strikes me that a NYT digital subscription will be a convenience tax for loyal readers.
While I think that it is unlikely that the CPB governmental largess will actually be liquidated by Congress in this fiscal year, I think that NPR has more of a potential revenue stream from a subscription model than does the NYT.
The success of the NYT’s subscription model will become apparent after it is implemented on March 28th.
17 March 2011
Washington’s Rules for Civility and Decent Behavior
In the wake of the assassination attempt of Rep. Gabriel Giffords (D-AZ 8th), there has been an ersatz effort to instill civility in public discourse. From the establishment of the National Institute for Civil Discourse to last week’s White House Conference on Bullying Prevention, which gathered several Cabinet Secretaries along with the First Couple to tackle civility amongst schoolchildren.
Being a political animal living between-the-beltways favorite contact sport is politics, I expect to have intense exchanges with ideas with whom I differ. The District of Calamity (sic) is one of the most partisan places anywhere, so civility is crucial. While I do not aspire for superficial consensus, I expect clarity in a civil conversation. Alas, such social graces are not always readily on display.
I recall having conversations with couple of professional collogues who had clear liberal leanings who thought nothing about labeling conservative community organizers as “Teabaggers”. After the invective is invoked a few times, I have to interrupt their venomous vituperations by asking, “Do you realize the crude sexual slur that you are invoking?” The coprophagic smile is a tell tale sign that the interlocultors think that they have cleverly scored points with their intentional insult. Such hedonistic hubris has promoted me to say: "While I enjoy chatting about current events and it’s fine if we disagree, I hope that we can do it without being disagreeable.” This elicits a nod for its reasonableness. So I continue:
What if I referred to the 42nd President–Bill Jefferson Clinton–as B.J. Clinton? It’s funny true enough and kind of apt, but it does not allow for an exchange of ideas. OK, can I call Democrats by their mascot–the jackass? Once again, humorous and some semblance of truth but it seems like those are kind of like fighting words for nothing of significance.
Surprisingly, that rhetorical tactic has pierced the veil of incivility, albeit in environments which require collegiality in close quarters.
But the union inspired thuggery and incivility that has been on display in the Wisconsin State Capitol over the last few weeks has started to been seen between-the-beltways. Yesterday, Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) was trapped inside of a fundraiser in Washington when a couple of thousand union protestors “spontaneously” shut down rush hour traffic to protest and block the building lobby. Such contentious hardball tactics recently received a bureaucratic blessing from the National Labor Relations Board in a decision over a 2008 workplace representation election at MasTec DirecTV. In the age of Obama, what constitutes a threat of violence in a workplace is to be determined by a complex set of criteria that requires massive administrative litigation before the determination is made. Effectively, the NLRB encouraged Unions to go “Break a leg” when muscling for union organizing elections.
With this in mind, I came across some personal principles from George Washington. Recent biographies which humanized our first President also reminded us that Washington had quite a temper which learned to govern. At the age of sixteen, Washington transcribed “The Rules of Civility and Decent Behavior” for his Jesuit instructors. These maxims helped morally mold the man throughout his military, diplomatic and public policy career. Those platitudes are in part:
- Let your countenance be pleasant, but in serious matters somewhat grave.
- Show not yourself glad at the misfortune of another, though he were your enemy.
- In writing or speaking, give to every person his due title according to his degree and the custom of the place.
- When a man does all he can, though it succeeds not well, blame not him that did it.
- Strive not with your superiors in argument, but always submit your judgment to others with modesty.
- Associate yourself with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for 'tis better to be alone than in bad company.
- Let your conversation be without malice or envy...And in all causes of passion admit reason to govern.
- Undertake not what you cannot perform, but be careful to keep your promise.
- When you speak of God and his attributes, let it be seriously and with reverence. Honor and obey your natural parents although they be poor.
- Let your recreations be manful, not sinful.
- Labor to keep alive in your breast that little spark of celestial fire called conscience.
These maxims helped morally mold Washington throughout his military, diplomatic and public policy career. There is a famous instance of William Payne who physically assaulted George Washington during a political argument and got away with it. Even though Washington was a military commander, he did not seek retribution. Washington requested a meeting with Payne the next day when Washington apologized for losing his temper in an unprotected moment and expressed the hope that they could still be friends. But do not mistake Washington as a polite pushover. Even when negotiating the American defeat in the Battle of New York of 1776, Washington refused the first two communiques from British Admiral Howe as Washington was respectively addressed as a General (and giving tacit recognition to the American opposition).
As President Washington extolled in his farewell address, “Observe good faith and justice towards all. Cultivate peace and harmony with all.” Washington’s Rules of Civil Discourse and Decent Behavior should be better heeded amongst the body politic as we work through trying public policy disputes without bullying or acting like political hooligans.
16 March 2011
Eminent Domain Abuse In The Garden State
One of my favorite computer pastimes is playing Sim City, an addictive city-building simulation game which has scenarios that can strive to react to nuclear plant meltdowns to spur economic development. As a cyber dictator, a Sim City mayor need not fret about eminent domain or the circumstances of displacing the sim citizens.
Mount Holly, New Jersey is a modest bedroom community of 11,700 residents on the outskirts of Philadelphia. There has been an eight year effort by the Township to facilitate the replacement of 350 1950s row-homes on 25 acres in Mount Holly Gardens in favor of a plan for the “Villages of Parker’s Mill” development by the Keating Urban Partners with 292 new town homes, 228 apartments and 54,000 sf of commercial space.
There are only 84 row-home owners left in Mount Holly Gardens, who are mostly long time Black and Latino residents who are retired and on fixed incomes. The Township has tried to strong arm the remaining residents of the closely knit Mount Holly Gardens community by threatening Eminent Domain on their properties, offering them settlements of between $35,000 to $49,000, which is about half of the cost of similar housing nearby.
Americans used to revel in the notion that a man’s home was his castle, until 2005, when the U.S. Supreme Court redefined the employment of Eminent Domain. In Kelo v. City of New London (CT), the High Court held in 5 to 4 ruling that the government can use economic growth as a permissible public use rationale for invoking the 5th Amendment Takings clause. Previously, public use involved takings that benefited the whole public like bridges, roads and maybe sports stadia, not crony capitalists or governmental coffers. Susette Kelo was a homeowner who was evicted from her property by eminent domain as part of a comprehensive redevelopment plan spearheaded by Pfizer which promised 3,169 new jobs and $1.2 million a year in tax revenues. Ironically, after Kelo was ousted from beloved property, the redeveloper was unable to secure financing and the “blighted” area became vacant.
In the wake of the public backlash against the Supreme Court’s holding, many states amended their eminent domain laws. Apparently not the case under the blue blooded regime under ex-Gov. John Corzine (D-NJ), but maybe there were not sufficient union interests to cover.
It is sad to see poor elderly minority property owners get taken advantage of by the strong hand of the government in favor of crony capitalism. But the economic cost benefit basis of this redevelopment is questionable.
- Mt. Holly Township has already spent $8.1 million in debt service since 2000 for the proposed “Villages at Parker’s Mill” project
- The Township has spent $17 Million for purchasing, demolishing, redeveloping and associated legal costs.
- The redevelopment project may increase schoolchildren by three fold, thereby increasing education costs by $1.4 million per annum.
- The Reading Associates estimates that the development will cost Mt. Holly over $341,000 a year.
Those are hair curling sunken costs and anticipated ancillary expenses for a modest community to carry in support of a long stalled redevelopment project.
The national economic downturn also have impacted the Mt. Holly redevelopment project. Townhomes are estimated to be worth 30% less than originally predicted (during the housing bubble) and rentals are thought to bring in 50% less an expected. Instead of being a windfall, the redevelopment project may cost Mt. Holly $1 Million a year. But at least it brings some shiny new buildings and scatters a pocket of vulnerable long time property owners.
As Mt. Holly soon will be filing eminent domain proceedings against hold out home owners. But the US 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals is still considering the case. While the Kelo holding bristles against a homeowner’s proprieties, it allows local governments to pick winners and losers when issuing eminent domain. But those decisions must be based on economic growth. May justice consider the real economic facts and not just based on developers’ dreams of hope and change.
15 March 2011
The True Costs of Gerrymandering
Aside from being a ten term incumbent, Rep. Corrine Brown is in a safe D+18 district. Yet her campaign coffers are virtually barren with a balance of $417. According to Brown's 2010 expenditure report, she spent $35,977 in hotel bills, $34,192 for catering, $32,242 for paid media, $24,266 for media consulting, $35,549 for fund raising consultants and $54,730 of direct mail publicity. The fund raising, media consulting and direct mail costs seem like payola and expenses for the insider campaign machinery. Some might interpret the catering and hospitality costs as living large while on the campaign hustings. But spending so much on “incidental” expenses on the campaign trail points to the perils of having an extremely gerrymandered district.
While it is unlikely to need to travel from stem to stern in the 3rd Congressional district in a day, it spans over 142 miles by surface roads. The district is in the major media markets of Orlando and Jacksonville along with Gainesville. This safe seat can be quite a costly district to defend. More importantly, it serves as a significant structural barrier for campaign challengers. The latter consequence of gerrymandering explains why Rep. Corrine Brown is fighting to challenge Amendment 6.
Florida voters decided during the 2010 general elections to enact a couple of measures to try to remove politics from the redistricting process. The newly drawn districts required legislative districts be compact, reasonable, and follow city, county, and geographic boundaries. The initiatives were designed to prevent the district's shapes from being drawn to favor a particular race, language, incumbent politician, or party affiliation. Amendment 5 applied to state legislative boundaries and Amendment 6 applied to Florida’s federal congressional redistricting.
Critics of the redistricting amendments observed that organizations tied to George Soros had contributed $7 Million to support passage of the amendments. Amendment opponents opined that the initiatives will result in court cases that will eventually result in judges drawing the districts. If it helps orient a novice to which way the wind blows, former Florida Gov. “Good Time” Charlie Crist favored passage of the ballot initiatives. In the end, an electorate which was weary of partisan politics and grotesque gerrymandering passed both propositions by a resounding 63% to 37% margin.
Rep. Corrine Brown is challenging Amendment 6 in court, joined in spirit by former Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL 25th) who had represented a geographically large district that seemed carved out to be R +5. Rep. Brown is going against her party and unions in arguing that Amendment 6's impetus to draw compact districts that do not favor political parties would not protect the “minority access” districts, of which she derives great benefit.
Other states are trying to implement non-partisan redistricting with questionable results. Virginia’s Independent Commission on Redistricting presented a couple of purely partisan proposals drawn by ivory tower academics which palpably punished Republicans in a Commonwealth that has been strongly trending red in the last few elections. California also just passed a ballot initiative to steer redistricting to consider a “community of interests” to ensure effective and fair representation.
Fortunately, the so called “bipartisan” Redistricting Commission’s report was only advisory. Ballot initiatives will lead to extended lawfare. It seems likely that unelected “Men In Black” will eventually draw the districts.
If one thinks that the Judicial branch can create legislative districts in an innocuous and efficient manner should consider the case of Texas. After the 1990 census, Texas gained three seats in Congress. But litigation prevented the permanent application of the Census results when redistricting. The eventual answer was to draw the districts using the old 1980 census data, in which Democrats had signficantly more proportional strength than they had in the 1990s. So the Democrats gained more power through lawfare and such incumbents had substantial advantages against challengers for the next few election cycles.
Republicans had been chastened by judicial interference in implementing the Voting Rights Act when redistricting, so the Grand Old Party embraced cynically embraced minority access districts by applying a packing strategy. Effectively, the GOP endorsed creating minority districts that had solid minority majorities creating safe districts to create more competitive districts elsewhere, thereby improving their lot elsewhere. Packing is nothing new, but it was taken to a whole new level of precision through the power of computers in applied statistical demographics. That can lead to districts that are co-joined by narrow Interstate highways.
Ever since the enactment of the Seventeenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the body politic has been minimizing the role of state legislators in our application of Federalism. The Judicial Branch stepped in to enforce Voting Rights Act and prevent any potential disenfranchisement. The solution to has been to get pre-clearance of any changes through the federal government, which can be as banal as switching polling place locations to approval of redistricting.
The advent of the Tea Party has awakened the great silent majority who want good governance and ideally less partisanship when spending our tax dollars. Such non-political types tend to recoil at the messiness of politics and governing.
Even though politics is my favorite contact sport, it is understandable that most people do not want to dwell on the minutia and recoil from adversarial debate. It calls to mind the quote attributed to Otto von Bismark “Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made.” But buying your meat prepackaged in a grocery store does not mean that it is not butchered.
As messy as it is, it is preferable to have elected officials accountable for their actions than to have political solutions imposed by the Judiciary or supposed non-partisan Commissions who apply their skewed predilections covertly or without consequence.
Labels:
DMV,
Election,
Law,
Politics,
Redistricting,
Vote Fraud
14 March 2011
Making a Mockery of Non-Partisan Redistricting
In compliance with the US Constitution, there is a decennial census to determine apportionment of Congressional representatives. The re-apportionment process often becomes partisan and victors receive the spoils, even if the gerrymandered districts look like surreal ink spots. Computers have allowed psephologists to create precise yet grotesquely drawn districts that protect most incumbents and favors a dominant majority party in a state. Lawfare can thwart Republican efforts to assert their strength in redistricting, as was evidence during the 1990 apportionment.
There has been a trend lately to establish non-partisan commissions to recommend redistricting plans. This appeals to many independents who seek good governance through a supposed non-partisan process. In fact, California voters approved Proposition 20--a Fair Districting initiative, and the California peoples' will may even be respected by the Judicial Branch.
In the abstract, a non-partisan redistricting process sounds wonderful. But the devil is in the details. And academic insiders are betting that the public will not pay attention to the details this far out from November 2012. Witness what went on in Virginia.
National Review reports that a draft plan by George Mason University Professor Michael McDonald on behalf of the supposedly “Bipartisan” Advisory Commission on Redistricting recommended carving out Republican Majority Leader Representative Eric Cantor’s (R-VA 7th) district. That is strange, as Virginia will not be losing any members due to redistricting. Amongst the thousands of plans to choose from, the Commission’s backup plan drew out long time Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA 10th), Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA 4th) and newcomer Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA 9th) who defeated long time incumbent Rick Boucher (D-VA 9th). These suggestions are coming in the wake of an 18% landslide victory of Gov. Bob McDonnell in 2009 and the defeat of 3 Virginia Democrat during the 2010 cycle.
Even mere mortals do not need the Professor Larry Sabato’s crystal ball to know how skewed are those suggestions. But in case there was any doubt about the partisan hack trick, Professor McDonald’s first Powerpoint side thanked the über left wing Brennan Center for Justice for its assistance. The Brennen Center pushed the propaganda that voter fraud is a myth and that the major motivation of Voter ID checks is to suppress the minority vote.
Because the Virginia Assembly majorities are split between the two chambers so neither party is likely to get exactly what they want. Analysis from the Washington Post expects that due to population shifts to Northern Virginia, Rep. Gerry Connelly (D-VA 11th) who won by less than 1000 votes in 2010 and Rep. Wolf will be drawn into safer districts.
Since this independent Redistricting Commission is only advisory, it would be wise for Gov. McDonnell to put the skewed Commission’s plans into the circular file and let the General Assembly duke it out while in Special Session to decide redistricting.
May this escapade be a lesson to those who yearn for less partisanship in politics that faceless functionaries and bureaucrats do not necessarily act for good governance reasons act as partisan without electoral consequences. We live in a democratic Republic where we hold our representatives responsible for their actions not a bureaucracy manipulated by partisan jackasses.
H/T: National Review
H/T: Washington Post
There has been a trend lately to establish non-partisan commissions to recommend redistricting plans. This appeals to many independents who seek good governance through a supposed non-partisan process. In fact, California voters approved Proposition 20--a Fair Districting initiative, and the California peoples' will may even be respected by the Judicial Branch.
In the abstract, a non-partisan redistricting process sounds wonderful. But the devil is in the details. And academic insiders are betting that the public will not pay attention to the details this far out from November 2012. Witness what went on in Virginia.
National Review reports that a draft plan by George Mason University Professor Michael McDonald on behalf of the supposedly “Bipartisan” Advisory Commission on Redistricting recommended carving out Republican Majority Leader Representative Eric Cantor’s (R-VA 7th) district. That is strange, as Virginia will not be losing any members due to redistricting. Amongst the thousands of plans to choose from, the Commission’s backup plan drew out long time Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA 10th), Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA 4th) and newcomer Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA 9th) who defeated long time incumbent Rick Boucher (D-VA 9th). These suggestions are coming in the wake of an 18% landslide victory of Gov. Bob McDonnell in 2009 and the defeat of 3 Virginia Democrat during the 2010 cycle.
Even mere mortals do not need the Professor Larry Sabato’s crystal ball to know how skewed are those suggestions. But in case there was any doubt about the partisan hack trick, Professor McDonald’s first Powerpoint side thanked the über left wing Brennan Center for Justice for its assistance. The Brennen Center pushed the propaganda that voter fraud is a myth and that the major motivation of Voter ID checks is to suppress the minority vote.
Since this independent Redistricting Commission is only advisory, it would be wise for Gov. McDonnell to put the skewed Commission’s plans into the circular file and let the General Assembly duke it out while in Special Session to decide redistricting.
May this escapade be a lesson to those who yearn for less partisanship in politics that faceless functionaries and bureaucrats do not necessarily act for good governance reasons act as partisan without electoral consequences. We live in a democratic Republic where we hold our representatives responsible for their actions not a bureaucracy manipulated by partisan jackasses.
H/T: National Review
H/T: Washington Post
Not Yet Raising Kaine
Ever since freshman Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) announced that he was not seeking a second term, there has been fevered speculation that former Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine (D-VA) would run to keep the seat blue.
Considering the razor thin margin that Webb won his 2006 election and Gov. Bob McDonnell’s impressive 18% victory in 2009, holding the seat will be difficult and costly for Democrats in a likely rematch against former Senator George Allen (R-VA). Other rumored Democrat candidates would be defeated freshman Congressman Tom Periello (D-VA 5th) and long time Representative Boucher (D-VA 9th) who lost in the 2010 Tea Party Tsunami.
Kaine is well position as the head of the Democrat National Committee so he has probably built up enough political chits to conduct a tough fought campaign. But Kaine is a young politician who was reportedly on a short list to be Vice President in the 2008 cycle, so it does not burnish your national credentials if you lost your Congressional race and then run for higher office.
About a month ago, President Obama called Kaine to encourage him to run for the Senate seat. Kaine was said to be reconsidering his initial reluctance to run but insisted that he needed more time to decide. Today, Kaine spoke before some University of Richmond Law students and indicated that he was “likely” to run for Senate, but Kaine stopped short of declaring his candidacy.
Kaine’s favorable remarks towards running for Senate sent the Twitter-verse ablaze. DNC spokesman tried to walk back misinterpretations of Kaine’s statements to deny that he was running but merely confirming that he was likely to run. Sure that is plausible but it was a probably deference with a nod and a wink. The DNC will need to find another leader, there are legal consequences to becoming a candidate. Moreover, most candidates want a flasher declaration of candidacy than a Law School Q & A session.
Kaine’s spokesman insisted that he will not announce anything this week, including at a dinner honoring his friend ex-Rep. Boucher. But it looks increasingly like 2012 will have a race between former Gov. Kaine and former Gov. Allen, which Roll Call deems a toss up.
Slow Walking WI Collective Bargaining Changes
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker (R-WI) achieved his objective of saving state worker jobs by changing collective bargaining over non-salary issues. This legislative victory was achieved only after several weeks of fleebagging by Democrat State Senators, a prolonged union mob occupation of the State Capitol and after union supporters physically threatening Republican State Senators.
Gov. Walker promised to sign the legislation “as quickly as he can legally” after it passed the Wisconsin State Assembly on a 52-42 vote. In fact, Gov. Walker accelerated his approval before the official signing ceremony as there were reports that local governments were rushing to approve agreements under the old collective bargaining regime. But Gov. Walker’s Executive expeditiousness is still not quick enough.
Wisconsin Secretary of State Doug La Follette (D-WI) is deliberately progressing slowly on publishing the bill, thereby making it law. Even though La Follette has possession of the legislation, he is not going to publish it until March 25th. Although one lawsuit to block implementation of these changes in state collective bargaining rules with state employees has failed, this should give the union opposition a few more kicks at the cat to find a sympathetic judge and succeed in lawfare Moreover, it gives municipalities even more time to finalize new contracts that circumnavigate the pension changes.
Presumably, La Follette will claim that he is living up to his motto on website which maintains "I believe my most important job is being there when you need help. As a third generation scion of Progressive gadfly “Fighting Bob” La Follette Sr. (R-WI), Doug La Follette has managed to virtually be Secretary of State for life. Doug LaFollette has held the job consecutively since 1982, although he had a close 4% margin in the November 2010 election.
It’s funny how many Democrat Secretaries of State will rush to certify election results when one of their confreres win, but will drag their feet with the opposition is victorious, most recently demonstrated with the Senator Scott Brown (R-MA) special election certification, who were eventually shamed into certifying speedily. Partisans were offended when then Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris did not bend the rules and followed the letter of the law when certifying the 2000 Florida election results.
The governing process is ordinarily exasperating enough. The fleebagging tactic that Wisconsin Democrats followed only compounded the difficult choices. While I feel that La Follette is playing politics, at least the time frame is within his legal discretion. I just hope that Doug La Follette’s tortoise pace of certification is not just another opposition tactic to never surrender.
Another Obama Environmental Mulligan
I was amazed to hear the details of President Obama’s schedule this weekend. America’s friend and Asian ally Japan is in a cascade of catastrophes that started with a powerful earthquake that generated a killer tsunami and is culminating in multiple nuclear reactor meltdowns. As this nightmare news is happening in real time, what is on President Obama’s schedule: a day of golf followed by a light-hearted appearance at the annual Press Gridiron Club dinner.
It is easy to conjure up the facile excuses that the White House will have for Obama’s casual schedule. Obama had already offered a statement of consolation for the people of Japan during his Friday press appearance. There was nothing that he could do in the Oval Office that he could not do on the links. A President needs some recreation to work off the pressure of being the leader of the free world. And this was the first time that President Obama had deigned to grace the Gridiron Club with his presence.
Be that as it may, it is horrible optics when there is an unfurling environmental catastrophe for the President to be spotted on the links. When President George W. Bush accepted his obligation of being a wartime President, he gave up golfing. During his first year in office, President Obama golfed 32 times, which was more than his predecessor did two four year terms.
ABC News noted this weekend that President Obama could not wait for spring as he golfed for the second weekend in a row. The reporter noted that these trips were not “work on your swing” trips–this is 18 hole expeditions. No wonder why TOTUS joked at the Gridiron Club “I’m not spending time on the golf course. I’m investing time in the golf course”. Funny but also an element of truth.
During the 2008 Presidential Campaign, Obama was obsessed about optics. So much so, that Obama’s Acceptance Speech at Denver’s Mile High Stadium had a background of Styrofoam Greek pillars to appear Olympian. This attention to optics is lacking while governing in Washington. While we think of Nero fiddling while Rome burned, it is easy to think of Obama golfing while there are environmental crises.
When hearing President Obama’s leisurely links visit as Japan was on the brink, I thought of Politizoid’s parody “Same As It Ever Was”:
The reoccurring kaleidoscope image of President Obama dressed in traditional golf wear as the world is collapsing around him really resonates. President Obama went golfing at least nine times while the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill was uncontained. If that was not bad enough, President Obama declared that the Gulf Oil Spill was the equivalent of 9/11 and then he went out golfing for four hours.
Less than a year later, there is another grave environmental crisis. Even though it was halfway around the globe, the United States has significant assets and interests in Japan. This was an opportunity for President Obama to have a mulligan for his muddied response to Deepwater Horizon.
The Leader of the Free World should take a more active role than offer perfunctory sympathetic pap at a press conference and then have a weekend of leisure. Maybe more things are being done behind the scenes, but images of meeting with National Security advisors are squeezed out by reports of the Presidential fun calendar. It did not help that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton claimed that US assets had delivered “some really important coolant” to a Japanese nuclear power plant, but that it did not actually happen.
It seems as Japanese nuclear reactors risk are melting down, President Obama is taking another mulligan on environmental crisis leadership.
Same as it ever was.
13 March 2011
Bridge Over Trading Water
Being a news junkie who is not reliant on National Peoples’ Radio (sic) for information, it is crucial to develop selective listening to tune out commercials and Charlie Sheen’s shenanigans. But the other evening, I heard an advocacy ad which made me prick up my ears. There was a campaign style ad run during Greta Van Susteren’s FNC show opposing the proposed Detroit River International Crossing (DRIC). The version of the ad which I saw urged viewers to call Gov. Rick Snyder (R-MI) to oppose the project.
Strange to see a regional advocacy ad on a national cable channel. Since I was watching on satellite television, it was not an ad just intended to coruscate Between-the-Beltways. It piqued my interest to learn about the public policy polemic and appreciate how and why politics needs to be played in this day and age.
The trading relationship between American and Canadian is the closest and most extensive in the world. In 2009, US-Canadian trade was about $593 Billion. In Michigan alone, that bi-lateral trading relationship is valued at over $43 Billion, with at least $6 Billion within the penumbra of the Blue Oval. Bilateral trade may have increased since NAFTA in 1989. But there was 1965 Auto Pact fostered close Canadian-American bilateral trade.
A combination of geography and economics makes the Detroit area a lynchpin for this trade relationship. Michigan and southern Ontario are industrially oriented, based in the automotive industry. The Ambassador Bridge, a four lane Art Deco and Streamline Moderne styled suspension bridge, was privately erecting in 1929. Its perfect placement on the Detroit River manages to capture 25% of the bi-lateral trade and 40% of the bi-lateral trucking That’s big money.
In 1979, Matty Moroun parlayed his interest in a small trucking line to buy out Warren Buffett’s 25% share in the troubled Detroit International Bridge Company. In total, Moroun spent $30 million to fully acquire the Ambassador Bridge. Ironically, the $30 million price was 30% less than the inflation-adjusted cost of building it 50 years earlier, The Ambassador Bridge is the only major border crossing that is privately owned and is estimated to be worth half a billion dollars.
The Ambassador Bridge generates an estimated $60 Million a year which translates to hefty profits. But Moroun owns seven trucking companies that have established close relationships with automotive manufacturers. Moroun also owns logistics firm; several customs brokerages; and a monopoly on duty-free retail, including a gasoline station at the Detroit end of the bridge and a currency-exchange service. All told, total revenue exceeds $1 billion a year.
The Ambassador Bridge has some chaffing security issues. After the terrorist attacks of September 11th 2001, Moroun wanted to ensure that GM, Ford and Chrysler (all Moroun’s clients) were not stranded. So Moroun ordered that the trucks be pulled aside and escorted across the bridge if that was necessary. To alleviate backups at customs in the aftermath of 9/11, customs personnel doubled yet they had to work with the six existing inspection booths. The US Federal Government had to haggle with Moroun as he owned the surrounding land. On his own, Moroun built three more customs stations, but was sued by the city of Detroit as he failed to receive zoning and building permits. Moroun insisted that he did not need any stinking permits as he was a “federal instrumentality”. After 3 ½ years of litigation, Moroun prevailed. But Morous forced the GSA to pay for this $2 Million “gift” for better security. How convenient.
Moroun opts to operate with impunity over transporting federal contraband. Federal law prohibits transporting corrosives, explosives, radioactive waste, and other toxic material across the border, but Moroun insists this does not apply on the Ambassador Bridge. Moroun issues “Letters of Authorization” to certain truckers to haul banned contents across the bridge. Might those letters be directed to Moroun owned trucking companies? Nevertheless, state troopers can not ticket truckers on the bridge–they must do so upon leaving.
Structurally, the bridge is 81 years old and it only has four lanes. There are issues that the ascent to the bridge is too tough for trucks. To answer some of these concerns and maintain his monopoly, Moroun proposed erecting a six lane twin span of the Ambassador Bridge and keep the older span for excess capacity. In furtherance of this effort, Moroun worked with Detroit and Michigan state officials to garner a $230 million Gateway Project that improved roadways on the Detroit side of the Ambassador Bridge. Cynics see the construction augments Moroun other land assets and intuit that the infrastructure are the footings for the proposed twin bridge. Yet the Canadian government is intransigent about allowing the twin span.
In Windsor, traffic leading to the Ambassador Bridge snakes through residential neighborhoods. A new alternative New International Trade Crossing located about two miles south of the Ambassador Bridge would more directly connect Canada Highway 401 (going to Toronto) with a crossing near Detroit’s Fort Wayne (away from downtown Detroit and also near I-96 and I-75). Of course, bad blood stemming from the Canadian government losing their 1970s lawsuit for 50% share in the Ambassador bridge and settling only for bridge and Canadian customs plaza improvements should not be discounted.
The Detroit River International Crossing (DRIC) has the Canadian Federal, Ontario Provincial and US Government on board for the US $2.1 Billion project. The only holdout has been the Michigan State government. To sweeten the long delayed deal, the Canadian government offered to front $550 Million, which represented Michigan’s contribution to the DRIC as an interest free loan to be repaid by collected tolls. With the deep deficits state budgets have, Moroun was banking on the hope that the newly elected Republican governor would favor keeping the border crossing in private hands and not risking state expenditures. But Gov. Snyder came out in favor of the DRIC, as Michigan could leverage the Canadian money to get 160% matching funding from the US DOT. Gov. Snyder also indicated that he agreed with the Canadian suggestion of dubbing the new crossing as the Gordie Howe bridge, honoring the connection between the Canadian born hockey great and Hockeytown where he made his mark in the NHL.
In response to the tides turning towards another Detroit River international crossing, Moroun has launched a $400,000 ad campaign to disparage the DRIC and hired Dick Morris to do public relations, hence the media appearances and FNC advocacy ad. Hiring Morris, who is the High Priest of Triangulation and going national gives the impression that Moroun is taking desperate measures for desperate times. Contributions to Michigan State Legislators is not enough to turn the tide, so it is an attempt to gin up some grass-tops pressure from Tea Party types who generally look askance at governmental projects and boondoggle "bridges to no-where"
It’s quite understandable why Moroun, the 321st richest American, would fight so hard. Not only would a nearby alternative deprive the Ambassador Bridge of its monopoly, Moroun would lose out on the profits from the adjacent properties that he owns. But major manufacturers would no longer feel obliged to transport their freight with Moroun owned truck lines, unless they still needed the sui-generis “Letters of Authorization” to carry excluded freight to customs. In fact, all of the major auto manufacturers are backing the DRIC.
Many in the midst of Mo-town know that Matty Moroun has vested interests in the Ambassador Bridge. They know that Moroun is fighting an alternative crossing. But they have no idea about the byzantine business dealings that enrich Moroun and only a slight inkling of his belligerence towards dealing with the various governmental entities. They just wonder why additional crossings, either through a new bridge or an expansion of the Ambassador Bridge, is taking so long.
Ordinary, one would assume that conservatives would want to privatize as many government functions as possible. We echo President Kennedy’s quip that Washington is a city that has Southern efficiency and Northern charm. We liken the effectiveness of governmental bureaucrats to the performance of Patty and Selma Bouvier in the Simpson’s Springfield DMV.
A strict construction view of the Constitution mandates that the government do certain discrete functions, amongst them are protecting the border and providing for common defense (policing power). The cacotopia science fiction film “Robocop” (1987) illustrates the tensions and competing corporate interests when essential governmental functions are ceded to private interests.
Matty Moroun has illustrated these aberrant interests with his management of the Ambassador Bridge. Allowing his trucking clients to cut to the front of customs after 9/11 shows that he looks out for his own interests in lieu of national security. The special “Letters of Authorization” flout federal law and Moroun shows no signs of co-operating with state enforcement. The Bridge Company has erected fencing along riverfront property that mimics the Department of Homeland Security handiwork but lacks its authority.
Moroun may campaign that the twin span is half built and will cost taxpayers nothing, but his track record with customs stations shows that he will eventually still stick it to taxpayers. Maroun gave an unconditional offer to privately build the twin span of the Ambassador Bridge for $600 million. But when governmental officials did not drop the alternative to the Ambassador Bridge, Moroun reneged on his contribution to the $240 Million Gateway project that exclusively benefits Moroun’s own asset. So much so that the Bridge Company President was jailed for contempt for not rebuilding the approaches to the Ambassador Bridge. I guess that Smithers was not available to take the rap.
Moroun does not seem like he is a friend to the public. In the 30 years that Moroun has owned the Ambassador Bridge, tolls for passenger cars have quadrupled and trucking tolls have doubled, whereas in the prior 50 years tolls were only raised once for passenger cars and never for trucks. Moroun’s trucking ownership interests and doubling the trucking tolls implicitly represents a kickback. And critic claim that the proposed twinning of the Ambassador Bridge would wipe out Mexican Town, the desirable tourist district that the Gateway Project was hoping to augment.
While crossing on the Ambassador Bridge have improved since its nadir on 9/11, it is estimated that delays into Canada cost $800 million a month. It is unwise to have one crossing take 40% of all bilateral truck shipments. Thus, it seems like the DRIC is a good deal, but it needs a better name. The Canadian acronym for the project NITC is not any better. The Gordie Howe Bridge is an apt moniker.
H/T: Forbes
H/T: (Detroit) Metro Times
H/T: Detroit News
Labels:
Ambassador Bridge,
Business,
DRIC,
Geopolitics,
Law,
Media Watch,
Politics,
Rick Snyder,
Video,
World
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



