Tag Archives: Washington DC

Respecting Differing Opinions

SEABROOKS SAYS: Attention please.  This is a minor power move as I seize the liberty that comes to the publisher. The article (actually a letter) that follows was just recently written by my 90 year old friend, Presbyterian minister and business consultant who has mentored me for decades.  I believe lots of very interested Americans are currently dealing with this issue right now – maybe you  too.  NOW THAT KNOW WHAT WILL YOU DO?

 23 February 

Howdy,

As indicated earlier, my village was struck with a malevolent virus from which I am slowly recovering. I have set tomorrow as the day to celebrate my back to normal. 

Sadly, during these weeks, things have occurred that might define a wider gap between you and me. Things that I will say below might find a strong difference of opinion.  

I read the Brooks article about resistance. His reference to Bonhoeffer sounds like what the “opposition forces” are about. St. Benedict’s model has appeal for the likes of me. The more strident forms of resistance to which he refers sound like guidance from the mainline media. Brooks was interviewed in a February 1 article in Christian Century – “Chasing beauty, finding grace.” I liked that article better. I have followed Brooks for years and read, Character. I disagree with his politics, but respect his thoughtfulness and the influence that theology has had on him including that of Reinhold Niebuhr.

However, he and other good people have chosen sides in the current political and cultural conflicts with which I disagree. In my unique career and associations, I have come to respect those who build things more than those who critique the builders. The harshest thought that is with me now is that we are witnessing a well-funded and well-led revolution to convert America from the democracy that has been our history to state managed socialism.

When you have the money of George Soros, the legal pool of the ACLU (now full of funds), the still-in-tact Illinois syndicate, a brilliant and “enchanting” leader like Obama who is leading the charge to revive his legacy, political “tools” like Nancy Pelosi, and the vast media that has chosen to use its power for a crusade more than for information – you have a substantial opposition to an administration that won the electoral votes and is bringing to the government people who have track records of achievement and who, instead of seeking political power, simply want to contribute to a sustainable future for our nation.  

I have confidence that those now aligned with the administration that includes political support in both houses of Congress, most state legislatures and state governors will prevail because they have the Constitution, commitment to obey laws, leaders who have made things happen instead of those who have spent their lives climbing political ladders, and millions of citizens willing to sustain their support in spite of ugly intimidation from the organized and often compensated protesters in their faces.

Sadly, your Academy has mostly aligned with the opposition. I heard a Duke economics professor report that he and many colleagues propose a federally-funded, national employment for all with a minimum guaranteed compensation. Duke has a program to equip students on how best to protest Trump. Many conservative students must closet themselves from intimidation from their professors and many professors encourage protests that often include criminal assaults against private properties.

I check on the news at night and check on my on-line media reports the next day. The gap between what happened and the twist that the New York Times (NYT) gives has led me to unsubscribe to the NYT. I still follow the Christian Science Monitor and Wall Street Journal and a few periodicals.

I read the article by Paul Prather. Although there seemed to be a tilt toward assigning many Christians who support the President as being “hung up” on authority and fear, I did agree with his statement that, “Grace people need a little authoritarianism to keep us from levitating away on shimmering clouds, and Law people need a big dose of Grace to keep them from getting swallowed whole into their profoundly constricted sphincters.” I don’t agree with his final demeaning characterization.  

Sadly, I see little ground for dialog in our society today. Nevertheless, I am more optimistic than many because I believe that many of the policies and projects of the administration will prove to be beneficial to more Americans than was the case with the previous administration. When we see evidence of promise-keeping and leadership and achievement, more views will change.

I read your article, “Against Contempt.” I understand the concerns you express. I do not defend Trump’s rhetoric and wish that he could stop tweeting. He is the rough to Obama’s smooth. I look at what he achieved. I look at his family. I look at the loyalty of his long time friends. I watch the ways he seeks to walk his talk and the support that he is gathering to make that happen. I compare that with the “flame throwers” and “bridge dynamiters” and politicians that have made their careers and wealth based on the style of people like Pelosi who openly advised a vote for the health care legislation without it being read or debated. We can find out what it says after we pass it, was what she affirmed. 

You are successful. You win generous prizes for writing about your views. I hope that as your career, like mine, slows down to a crawl, you are happy with what you have achieved. I have not received $25,000 prizes and have not been successful getting a book commercially published, but I am happy with what I have achieved. The experiences and relationships of my career have afforded me a remarkable life in which I have learned much about the world and its people. God has been good to me and I have tried to be a responsible steward of the Grace with which my life has been blessed.

So, here we are – very separated in our views about the world in which we live – but, hopefully, continuing to respect each other and maybe finding ways to join the “little platoons” of citizens who strive to rectify the excesses of “numerous democracy” so feared by the authors of the U.S. Constitution.

Cheers and best wishes,

Irving

The Election Nightmare

SEABROOK DAYS: Charlie Gray is right on target.  Our political and election system is a huge mess and extremely expensive.  Unfortunately, what we have and use is totally outdated. Failure to improve shows the poor quality of representation by our reps in DC.  NOW THAT YOU KNOW, WHAT WILL YOU DO?

Every day at 10:15 am and 4:15 pm, I get a robo call on my cell phone from “unavailable”. Other times during the day, I get calls from California, New York and Nebraska. I, of course, do not answer them but it is maddening.

I understand that some people get dozens of robo calls each day.  They are generally for political contributions.  I have subscribed to “Do Not Call” but to no avail. It seems once you have contributed to a political candidate, which most good citizens desire to do, you are placed on a list.  This list apparently becomes available to candidates and political causes from everywhere.

After November, there will be a slight break before the next election cycle begins. There seems to be a constant election, considered states offices and the House of Representatives. There is only one conclusion – our political system is broken.  The elections last too long and are way too expensive. Instead of having one national primary on the same day, they are spread out from February to June. It is estimated that the democratic and republican candidates will spend over one billion dollars on each election.  And in the end, who do we get – a dead-locked Federal government that cannot function.

Our constitution was drafted almost 250 years ago for 13 mostly agrarian states. It does not work for 50 diverse states in the 21st Century.  Each state gets two senators, regardless of population.  The president is elected by the Electoral College.  This system has resulted generally in the Congress being controlled by one party and the Executive Branch by another.  The Supreme Court is determined by which party gets to appoint the majority of justices, who serve for life.

Now, with constant and biased media bombardment, the population has been herded into opposing camps, resulting in bitter confrontation and more gridlock. Families and good friends are often estranged or scare to mention politics for fear of alienating someone.  The whole thing is a mess and is tearing our country apart.  The winner of this year’s presidency will be the candidate who gets less hate votes than the other.

Are we stuck with this terrible situation forever? What can we do? I’m afraid we will have to change our parties, our primaries and maybe our constitution. Abolishing all parties would be best and candidates could be judged on their qualification and positions. Primaries should be on the same day.  Campaigns should be limited to six months, three for primary and three for general election. Campaigns should be financed by public funds, allocated by a candidate’s acceptability by the public as determined by polling data.  States should be represented in Congress by population and everyone should be elected by popular vote.  Gerrymandering should be prohibited and voting districts established by independent panels in each state, subject to court review to determine impartibility, political and robo calls should be prohibited.

There are many other changes that could be made to ensure our political process is fair and enjoyable for the candidates and the public. But to ignore the problem will only make it worse, leading to frustration, hate and division. .

I don’t want to spend my remaining years dodging phone calls, talking about the weather and watching the hate and division grow in our country. Do you?

Let’s demand that something be done.

Charles Gray
Former attorney

Reviving the American Dream

By Earl Mathers, Gaston County Manager

The following is strictly my personal opinion. Working in Washington, DC more than a decade ago, I had the opportunity to engage David Walker, former Comptroller General of the United States, as a speaker for a conference I was hosting.  Mr. Walker had the bully pulpit In DC because he held a position in which he had ready access to economic and fiscal information at the highest levels, a first rate team of professionals and could not be fired by anyone for speaking out for the duration of his fifteen-year term.  At one point I asked Mr. Walker if people on the Hill were listening to him and his response was something like “very rarely”.

During that time and for some years before, he and others were devoted to educating Congress on the perils of maintaining our questionable financial management practices as a nation.  This miscarriage of fiduciary responsibility is well known to most observers of the American political process and generally involves the avoidance of fiscal discipline.  Specifically, Congress and the President have ignored looming problems with Social Security, Medicare and the need for both entitlement reform and fiscal restraint to deal with our national debt which exceeds $17 trillion.  In addition, we have failed to make the kinds of strategic investments that will promote economic vitality and American competitiveness. All of these problems were set forth more recently by the Boyles-Simpson Commission which was authorized by President Obama.  Like Mr. Walker’s earlier recommendations, the work by Boyles Simpson was disregarded despite the fact that the remedies for our fiscal problems have been known for many years.

This recalcitrance is troubling locally for a number of reasons. In coming decades, servicing the national debt and covering the costs of Social Security and Medicare will consume ever larger portions of the federal budget.  Local governments deliver a broad array of services that are essential for our citizens.  Everyone in local government has seen a recent decline in both intergovernmental transfers and grants.  These forms of revenue support many types of locally delivered services and may be irreplaceable considering the limitations of local revenue generation capacity.  Secondly, we are informed that succeeding generations of Americans will not be able to sustain the same levels of economic prosperity their parents have enjoyed.  Finally, our weakened financial condition makes us more vulnerable to all sorts of calamities and inhibits our nation’s ability to make the kinds of strategic investments that will promote future economic vibrancy and quality of life.  In short, abdication of fiduciary responsibility at the federal level will have a trickle-down effect on local government and citizens.

Although the remedies to these problems are far from painless, the solutions are well known.  The real obstacles seem to be the lack of political will to address these challenges and an operating environment in Washington which is scandalously polarized.  Ultimately, the repercussions of this inaction on the part of Congress and the President will be borne by American taxpayers.  Various groups, including the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, have pointed out that correcting our fiscal imbalance can be accomplished in a gradual manner that supports economic growth and protects the most vulnerable in society. Delaying action, however, simply exacerbates the problem and extends the pain further into the future.  Instead of politics as usual and lame attempts to deflect blame, America desperately needs strong bipartisan leadership at the national level that is willing to take decisive action.  Climbing out of the hole we have dug for ourselves may require a generation of belt tightening.  The alternatives of continued brinksmanship, a gradual decline in American influence and the inability to address strategic priorities is even less appealing.  It is time for Congress and the President to revive the American Dream.