Letter to the Editor, Capital Times Forum page/Voice of the People
I must say that I was dismayed after reading the political discussion in The Wisconsin Way’s position paper, “Wisconsin at the Crossroads.” I found this discussion lacking in candor if not disingenuous. I believe that many citizens will read this segment and feel disheartened by such a simplistic analysis of the central political problem facing Wisconsin. Are we really expected to believe that the single greatest problem at our state Capital should be understood and has to do simply with partisan gridlock and ideological inflexibility?
It’s not that “our elected officials are trapped in a political process that thrives on issue polarization.” Rather it’s you and I, the voters and taxpayers of this state, who are trapped by allowing the rich and powerful to own our lawmakers. Our legislators are doing just fine, thank you, by repeatedly staying in office owing to big fat contributions year after year.
Any fair and honest discussion of the present context and process of policy making at our Capital it seems to me must, at its center, be focused on the corrupt pay-to-play culture that exists there. What good would be accomplished if the people of Wisconsin, through a state-wide conversation and consensus, for example, should come to the conclusion that indeed corporations in Wisconsin should be taxed more and also by the community in which they are located?
This enraged citizen taxpayer believes that any solution that ignores the need for comprehensive campaign finance reform in Wisconsin will be a paper tiger and go the same way as most other such initiatives have gone. It will be little more than shifting the sand piles around because reform, without the people owning and controlling their government, is futile.
Respectfully,
William R. Benedict
Monday, December 10, 2007
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Stem Cell Debate is Needed
Have Wisconsin taxpayers been deprived of having a vigorous and diverse discussion regarding the future of Wisconsin’s embryonic stem cell research in our State? I think so! I believe one reason for this is the polarized, highly partisan, and special interest-owned state legislature. It is due to legislators’ eagerness to play it safe and stay in office versus fairly representing the diverse and complex needs of all the people of Wisconsin.
To date the legislature’s single flex reaction has been to try and criminalize perhaps the most important scientific discovery of our lifetime. Shame on our state legislature for its inertia and lack of policy leadership on perhaps the most important issue it will ever face.
Recently I attended a lecture sponsored by the Wisconsin Academy of sciences arts & letters entitled, “Tales from the Other Biotech Frontier” by Alta Charo of the University of Wisconsin/Madison Law and Medical School. The subtext for this talk was how our policy makers here in Wisconsin can keep our state competitive. Charo had recently spent a year in California and informed us how this state “has become the world’s leader in stem cell research.” She referred to the state’s 3 billion dollar research program and how they plan to loan 300 million dollars each year over ten years to support stem cell research in California.
Charo reviewed the various stem cell stakeholder groups and the role that each of them played since the state’s referendum, Proposition 71, was approved by over sixty percent of the voters. Most of Charo’s talk was a provocative narrative of how a real democracy is supposed to work. All the actors had the opportunity to make their rights, needs and wishes known.
Stakeholders included the governor, legislature, taxpayers, women health groups, the religious community, the university community, biotech companies, patient and social justice activists, the LGBT community, people of color, and disabilities communities. What has played out over the past five years can best be described as how a diverse grassroots democracy is supposed to work when confronted with a very complex and potentially life changing issue.
Wisconsin has not had this debate. Perhaps now with James Thomson and JunyingYu’s latest stem cell alternative discovery ---using human skin cells in place of human embryonic stem cells --- the citizens of Wisconsin will begin talking over their dinner tables and with their neighbors about the tremendous speed with which biotechnology is developing and how it is likely to affect our lives and especially the lives of our grandchildren.
What accounts for the fact that there have been no stem cell policy initiatives from our legislature, including not a dollar, for even basic stem cell research? Should not the Wisconsin taxpayers insist on state policies to insure that research in Wisconsin is conducted in a safe and ethical manner and that public benefits, including affordable and accessible stem cell-based therapies, will follow?
Why should Wisconsin taxpayers pay multiple times for the benefits of stem-cell research? Should they pay for basic research now and again later for costly commercial therapies? Should they pay once when they employ a Wisconsin stem-cell research scientist and again when that scientist makes a major discovery? And, then again, when that publicly supported discovery results in a disease-curing commercial stem-cell-based therapy?
Shouldn’t Wisconsin taxpayers receive a payback if and when a revenue stream results from publicly funded research? Shouldn’t all Wisconsin taxpayers, including our underserved and uninsured populations, benefit from more affordable and accessible stem sell therapies?
And finally, why at the epicenter of embryonic stem cell research, where the first human embryonic stem cell was first derived, is there such a deafening public silence? Only through greater transparent discussions in the public square can we find the clarity and balance that we all seek between those areas where more scientific progress is still needed and areas where caution and perhaps enough human engineering is enough? In a great progressive state like Wisconsin, all the stakeholders, including especially our young people, need to come to the table and reason together.
To date the legislature’s single flex reaction has been to try and criminalize perhaps the most important scientific discovery of our lifetime. Shame on our state legislature for its inertia and lack of policy leadership on perhaps the most important issue it will ever face.
Recently I attended a lecture sponsored by the Wisconsin Academy of sciences arts & letters entitled, “Tales from the Other Biotech Frontier” by Alta Charo of the University of Wisconsin/Madison Law and Medical School. The subtext for this talk was how our policy makers here in Wisconsin can keep our state competitive. Charo had recently spent a year in California and informed us how this state “has become the world’s leader in stem cell research.” She referred to the state’s 3 billion dollar research program and how they plan to loan 300 million dollars each year over ten years to support stem cell research in California.
Charo reviewed the various stem cell stakeholder groups and the role that each of them played since the state’s referendum, Proposition 71, was approved by over sixty percent of the voters. Most of Charo’s talk was a provocative narrative of how a real democracy is supposed to work. All the actors had the opportunity to make their rights, needs and wishes known.
Stakeholders included the governor, legislature, taxpayers, women health groups, the religious community, the university community, biotech companies, patient and social justice activists, the LGBT community, people of color, and disabilities communities. What has played out over the past five years can best be described as how a diverse grassroots democracy is supposed to work when confronted with a very complex and potentially life changing issue.
Wisconsin has not had this debate. Perhaps now with James Thomson and JunyingYu’s latest stem cell alternative discovery ---using human skin cells in place of human embryonic stem cells --- the citizens of Wisconsin will begin talking over their dinner tables and with their neighbors about the tremendous speed with which biotechnology is developing and how it is likely to affect our lives and especially the lives of our grandchildren.
What accounts for the fact that there have been no stem cell policy initiatives from our legislature, including not a dollar, for even basic stem cell research? Should not the Wisconsin taxpayers insist on state policies to insure that research in Wisconsin is conducted in a safe and ethical manner and that public benefits, including affordable and accessible stem cell-based therapies, will follow?
Why should Wisconsin taxpayers pay multiple times for the benefits of stem-cell research? Should they pay for basic research now and again later for costly commercial therapies? Should they pay once when they employ a Wisconsin stem-cell research scientist and again when that scientist makes a major discovery? And, then again, when that publicly supported discovery results in a disease-curing commercial stem-cell-based therapy?
Shouldn’t Wisconsin taxpayers receive a payback if and when a revenue stream results from publicly funded research? Shouldn’t all Wisconsin taxpayers, including our underserved and uninsured populations, benefit from more affordable and accessible stem sell therapies?
And finally, why at the epicenter of embryonic stem cell research, where the first human embryonic stem cell was first derived, is there such a deafening public silence? Only through greater transparent discussions in the public square can we find the clarity and balance that we all seek between those areas where more scientific progress is still needed and areas where caution and perhaps enough human engineering is enough? In a great progressive state like Wisconsin, all the stakeholders, including especially our young people, need to come to the table and reason together.
Monday, November 12, 2007
Unity of Madison Theatre
To: webmaster@madstage.com
Eric - Deenah Givens, Social Justice Justice Minister and myself (William R. Benedict), a member of Unity of Madison's Social Justice Advisory Council, met with Sarah Blake this morning regarding our plans to develop a small theatre group that would produce plays that would promote campaign finance reform and/or clean government.
We haven't officially named our group yet but for now we will simply call it "Unity of Madison Theatre." Our plans now call for calling for scripts relating to campaign finance reform.
Just want to let you know that Sarah discussed and highly recommended your site as an excellent resource for people like us who wish to start a new theatre. As we go along in the process we plan to use MadStage to help us recruit play participants, advertise and generally in whatever way that we can.
In my blog, I will include periodic postings on our theatre's progress, show dates, etc. I will also include MadStage's URL in my list of links so that when we join and advertise through MadStage it will be easy for my readers to contact us. I also hope that we can join and support this website.
Best regards, Bill Benedict
Eric - Deenah Givens, Social Justice Justice Minister and myself (William R. Benedict), a member of Unity of Madison's Social Justice Advisory Council, met with Sarah Blake this morning regarding our plans to develop a small theatre group that would produce plays that would promote campaign finance reform and/or clean government.
We haven't officially named our group yet but for now we will simply call it "Unity of Madison Theatre." Our plans now call for calling for scripts relating to campaign finance reform.
Just want to let you know that Sarah discussed and highly recommended your site as an excellent resource for people like us who wish to start a new theatre. As we go along in the process we plan to use MadStage to help us recruit play participants, advertise and generally in whatever way that we can.
In my blog, I will include periodic postings on our theatre's progress, show dates, etc. I will also include MadStage's URL in my list of links so that when we join and advertise through MadStage it will be easy for my readers to contact us. I also hope that we can join and support this website.
Best regards, Bill Benedict
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Restore religion to public square
Letter to the Editor
Wisconsin State Journal
As a citizen who is deeply concerned about ever growing voter apathy I found Bishop Morlino’s defense of his actions both refreshing and encouraging. With vacuous and expensive sham attack ads replacing a once vibrant political debate, it’s way past time when both right, left and mainstream religion once again join fully and vigorously in the public discourse.
In a society with ever growing political correctness both Bishop Morlino and Pope Benedict have been courageous in clearly stating doctrinal positions, for example, “there is one God…Christ Jesus” – and letting the chips fall where they may.
I become uneasy when I read that America’s religious fervor is becoming increasingly non-doctrinal and private. In such a climate differing ideas ---the heart of a vibrant democracy --- are lost from public debate.
According to religious sociologist Alan Wolfe, what increasingly matters to most Christians are not “ideas” but feelings and “having a personal relationship with Jesus.” If Pope Benedict and Bishop Morlino succeed in bringing their flocks back into the public square greater voter turnout and a richer democracy will follow.
Respectfully,
William R. Benedict
Madison, WI
Wisconsin State Journal
As a citizen who is deeply concerned about ever growing voter apathy I found Bishop Morlino’s defense of his actions both refreshing and encouraging. With vacuous and expensive sham attack ads replacing a once vibrant political debate, it’s way past time when both right, left and mainstream religion once again join fully and vigorously in the public discourse.
In a society with ever growing political correctness both Bishop Morlino and Pope Benedict have been courageous in clearly stating doctrinal positions, for example, “there is one God…Christ Jesus” – and letting the chips fall where they may.
I become uneasy when I read that America’s religious fervor is becoming increasingly non-doctrinal and private. In such a climate differing ideas ---the heart of a vibrant democracy --- are lost from public debate.
According to religious sociologist Alan Wolfe, what increasingly matters to most Christians are not “ideas” but feelings and “having a personal relationship with Jesus.” If Pope Benedict and Bishop Morlino succeed in bringing their flocks back into the public square greater voter turnout and a richer democracy will follow.
Respectfully,
William R. Benedict
Madison, WI
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Government Accountability Board Meeting Public Testimony
Question at Hand: The Qualifications of the new GAB’s Legal Counsel
My name is William R. Benedict and I would like to thank the members of the Government Accountability Board for allowing me to speak about the qualifications of the Board’s new legal council. As a father and grandfather who is committed to preserving our increasingly threatened democracy for future generations I consider this opportunity indeed a privilege and honor.
In addition to the formal qualifications which are already now in place for the legal council and which I clearly support, this morning I want to strongly support the need for a legal counsel devoted to clarity and pro-activeness as well as the need for a fresh face. I believe these qualities are necessary if Wisconsin is to reclaim its reputation for clean, open and accountable government.
Clarity, because enforcement is much more difficult when the general public remains uninformed, confused, fettered and disengaged from the enforcement process due to not having more complete, user friendly and readily accessible information on campaign contributions.
In a recent 2007 publication by the Brennan Center for Justice, entitled “Campaign Finance in Wisconsin” the authors report appalling Wisconsin performance results in an independent nationwide study. The investigators found the Wisconsin Election Board’s disclosure database was incomplete due to both electronic and more archaic manual reporting practices. Such incongruent and confounding information acted to make the data largely inaccessible and unusable to the public and therefore unacceptable receiving a grade of F for failing. Similarly, even when this information was presented in summary reports, the technical usability of the Board’s website was seriously lacking and received a D. Wisconsin received an overall grade of C- and was ranked twenty second for its disclosure system. This failure should no longer be tolerated.
In a very real sense the Board’s disclosure database is its number one weapon in defense of democracy in Wisconsin. The need for this information to be in user friendly form, readily accessible and transparent, complete and accurate is perhaps the Board’s number one priority. Without it, both the Board’s internal effectiveness, especially with respect to its prosecutorial function, and the public’s right to know, and its ability to engage corruption in whatever form, will remain seriously compromised.
Pro-activeness, because our previous two boards and their leadership, I believe, were too passive and indecisive, particularly in the enforcement of the Board’s laws, rules, orders and formal opinions. It should no longer be acceptable for the new Board or its legal council to continue sitting passively by, waiting for a concerned citizen or group to first gather all the evidence and file a formal complaint.
Rather the legal counsel should take the initiative and proceed when he or she believes that it is likely that a violation has occurred. Perhaps no more important corrective action could be taken to restore the public’s confidence in this new Board.
A fresh face - Most importantly, if the new GAB truly wishes to bring an end to business as usual at our capitol, the new legal council will not be encumbered with any baggage, including loyalties to previously failed practices or systems.
He or she will be a fresh face and bring along fresh ideas for insuring the integrity of Wisconsin politics. It’s clear that the old Boards and their leadership have failed and lost the confidence of the Wisconsin citizen. If the word “accountability” in the Board’s new name is to have any real credibility, it seems to me, the last thing the Board should do is retain the old leadership. When this personnel decision is viewed in the context of our recent corruption scandal along with the subsequent public disfavor and mistrust, there is no valid alternative.
Thanks again so much for allowing me to speak this morning. By your decision to hold this open public meeting you have clearly demonstrated and signaled to me and to all Wisconsin citizens that your trademark will truly be one of transparency, openness and equity. Thank you.
My name is William R. Benedict and I would like to thank the members of the Government Accountability Board for allowing me to speak about the qualifications of the Board’s new legal council. As a father and grandfather who is committed to preserving our increasingly threatened democracy for future generations I consider this opportunity indeed a privilege and honor.
In addition to the formal qualifications which are already now in place for the legal council and which I clearly support, this morning I want to strongly support the need for a legal counsel devoted to clarity and pro-activeness as well as the need for a fresh face. I believe these qualities are necessary if Wisconsin is to reclaim its reputation for clean, open and accountable government.
Clarity, because enforcement is much more difficult when the general public remains uninformed, confused, fettered and disengaged from the enforcement process due to not having more complete, user friendly and readily accessible information on campaign contributions.
In a recent 2007 publication by the Brennan Center for Justice, entitled “Campaign Finance in Wisconsin” the authors report appalling Wisconsin performance results in an independent nationwide study. The investigators found the Wisconsin Election Board’s disclosure database was incomplete due to both electronic and more archaic manual reporting practices. Such incongruent and confounding information acted to make the data largely inaccessible and unusable to the public and therefore unacceptable receiving a grade of F for failing. Similarly, even when this information was presented in summary reports, the technical usability of the Board’s website was seriously lacking and received a D. Wisconsin received an overall grade of C- and was ranked twenty second for its disclosure system. This failure should no longer be tolerated.
In a very real sense the Board’s disclosure database is its number one weapon in defense of democracy in Wisconsin. The need for this information to be in user friendly form, readily accessible and transparent, complete and accurate is perhaps the Board’s number one priority. Without it, both the Board’s internal effectiveness, especially with respect to its prosecutorial function, and the public’s right to know, and its ability to engage corruption in whatever form, will remain seriously compromised.
Pro-activeness, because our previous two boards and their leadership, I believe, were too passive and indecisive, particularly in the enforcement of the Board’s laws, rules, orders and formal opinions. It should no longer be acceptable for the new Board or its legal council to continue sitting passively by, waiting for a concerned citizen or group to first gather all the evidence and file a formal complaint.
Rather the legal counsel should take the initiative and proceed when he or she believes that it is likely that a violation has occurred. Perhaps no more important corrective action could be taken to restore the public’s confidence in this new Board.
A fresh face - Most importantly, if the new GAB truly wishes to bring an end to business as usual at our capitol, the new legal council will not be encumbered with any baggage, including loyalties to previously failed practices or systems.
He or she will be a fresh face and bring along fresh ideas for insuring the integrity of Wisconsin politics. It’s clear that the old Boards and their leadership have failed and lost the confidence of the Wisconsin citizen. If the word “accountability” in the Board’s new name is to have any real credibility, it seems to me, the last thing the Board should do is retain the old leadership. When this personnel decision is viewed in the context of our recent corruption scandal along with the subsequent public disfavor and mistrust, there is no valid alternative.
Thanks again so much for allowing me to speak this morning. By your decision to hold this open public meeting you have clearly demonstrated and signaled to me and to all Wisconsin citizens that your trademark will truly be one of transparency, openness and equity. Thank you.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Let’s Not Be Bamboozled
In order to help ensure more time for each presenter to share their proposal on the 25th, I ask that you take some time to consider the issues I raise here now : Thanks so much for the time that you have already given me. I know you are all very busy. Bill
Sue presented us/me with a beautifully wrapped Easter proposal, and there is little question that it’s a very worthy human, deeply felt issue that we at Unity cannot ignore, nor should we. But that being said, let us not be bamboozled/tricked or thrown off track by such political tactics ---not Sue’s, but the special interests!
In researching my own project proposal I have been alerted that such issues as banning gay marriages and civil unions and promoting concealed weapons legislation are largely diversionary tactics or snares set by large special interest groups to trap us into talking about and working for these hot button issues rather than keeping a steady and persistent focus on real, honest people issues such as clean water, health care, adequate and equitable school funding and campaign finance reform.
Special interests and corporations who have bought and now own our legislators totally, use such legislation as a ruse to distract and deter us from the people’s interests. I was informed that the proof in the putting is the fact these big interests deliberately bring such issues forward not at off year or local elections but at the state wide and congressional elections that are guaranteed to bring out the extreme right who will vote to keep their paid for and bought candidates in office and that will serve the exclusive interests of the special interests, including corporations. I learned that seven or eight states have already used ban gay unions and marriage bans in order to control and maintain the electoral status quo in their respective Houses, and with respect to and significant health care and environmental initiatives as well.
By maintaining such control of your legislators they can continue to pass preemptive legislation that serves their own special interests but, in fact, is best decided at the local level, i.e. no smoking, the removal of old billboard signage, land use, etc. Such big interest here in Wisconsin spent 6.5 to 1.15 million dollars or 13 times more than that spend by everyone else (that includes you and me) to prevent local decision-making. This is big interest’s means or tactics for preventing any fundamental changes from appearing on the legislative agenda.
For these reasons, then, I strongly urge the Advisory Council to assign the proposed “Fair Wisconsin” or the “Love Thy Neighbor” project to the Human Rights sub-committee, in order that more structural and substantive up-stream work can begin now.
With respect the gay union ban, whether it is obtaining petition signatures, canvassing the neighborhood or whatever, these Unity activities need not deter us, nor should they. I would like to remind the group that Dr. Lichterman has already warn us that such seductive and alluring causes will constantly be brought before us. But because our cause is so great to our children and our grand children’s freedom and democracy, let us hold fast.
I believe that here in Wisconsin we are now a critical period where the balance can be tipped either in the direction of campaign reform or continuing down the slippery slope that we are now on. If what has already happened, and is now happening, at our Capitol is not enough to rouse out of complacency, how much more alienation and loss of our freedom can we take?
If there was ever in our Nation’s history a time when we need to stand up and speak up, it is now. A recent Wisconsin poll shows that only 7% of the citizens of Wisconsin believe that their legislators represent their (the people’s) best interests. We need to regain our trust and faith in our public institutions and in our representatives. Your legislator and mine are arrogant and emotionally and economically removed from the people ---you and me. And worse, they believe that they can do no wrong and are untouchable. Let us begin!
Sue presented us/me with a beautifully wrapped Easter proposal, and there is little question that it’s a very worthy human, deeply felt issue that we at Unity cannot ignore, nor should we. But that being said, let us not be bamboozled/tricked or thrown off track by such political tactics ---not Sue’s, but the special interests!
In researching my own project proposal I have been alerted that such issues as banning gay marriages and civil unions and promoting concealed weapons legislation are largely diversionary tactics or snares set by large special interest groups to trap us into talking about and working for these hot button issues rather than keeping a steady and persistent focus on real, honest people issues such as clean water, health care, adequate and equitable school funding and campaign finance reform.
Special interests and corporations who have bought and now own our legislators totally, use such legislation as a ruse to distract and deter us from the people’s interests. I was informed that the proof in the putting is the fact these big interests deliberately bring such issues forward not at off year or local elections but at the state wide and congressional elections that are guaranteed to bring out the extreme right who will vote to keep their paid for and bought candidates in office and that will serve the exclusive interests of the special interests, including corporations. I learned that seven or eight states have already used ban gay unions and marriage bans in order to control and maintain the electoral status quo in their respective Houses, and with respect to and significant health care and environmental initiatives as well.
By maintaining such control of your legislators they can continue to pass preemptive legislation that serves their own special interests but, in fact, is best decided at the local level, i.e. no smoking, the removal of old billboard signage, land use, etc. Such big interest here in Wisconsin spent 6.5 to 1.15 million dollars or 13 times more than that spend by everyone else (that includes you and me) to prevent local decision-making. This is big interest’s means or tactics for preventing any fundamental changes from appearing on the legislative agenda.
For these reasons, then, I strongly urge the Advisory Council to assign the proposed “Fair Wisconsin” or the “Love Thy Neighbor” project to the Human Rights sub-committee, in order that more structural and substantive up-stream work can begin now.
With respect the gay union ban, whether it is obtaining petition signatures, canvassing the neighborhood or whatever, these Unity activities need not deter us, nor should they. I would like to remind the group that Dr. Lichterman has already warn us that such seductive and alluring causes will constantly be brought before us. But because our cause is so great to our children and our grand children’s freedom and democracy, let us hold fast.
I believe that here in Wisconsin we are now a critical period where the balance can be tipped either in the direction of campaign reform or continuing down the slippery slope that we are now on. If what has already happened, and is now happening, at our Capitol is not enough to rouse out of complacency, how much more alienation and loss of our freedom can we take?
If there was ever in our Nation’s history a time when we need to stand up and speak up, it is now. A recent Wisconsin poll shows that only 7% of the citizens of Wisconsin believe that their legislators represent their (the people’s) best interests. We need to regain our trust and faith in our public institutions and in our representatives. Your legislator and mine are arrogant and emotionally and economically removed from the people ---you and me. And worse, they believe that they can do no wrong and are untouchable. Let us begin!
Friday, October 19, 2007
Now is time to set up stem-cell oversight
By William R. Benedict
Wisconsin State Journal
Guest Column
October 19, 2007
This taxpayer attended the recent Madison Plan Commission’s public hearing on the proposed new Wisconsin Institutes of Discovery.
This project is scheduled to come before our City Council on November 6th. The chosen site on the southwest end of the UW campus has been described as “an unusual marriage of public and private dollars.”
The commingling of public, non-profit and proprietary interests can be rich soil for both a “nimble” and successful collaborative race for stem-based cures and for both jobs and medical therapies for all our citizens.
However without a transparent process and proper policies and safeguards in place multiple conflicts of interest could threaten both our public treasury and trust.
Wisconsin taxpayers and all who will benefit from cell-based medical therapies deserve more than good intentions regardless of how sincere and honorable they may be. Like safe and proven architecture and construction practices, safe and proven policy and intellectual property (IP) models now also exist.
These models are specifically designed to detect and prevent special interest conflicts by groups or individuals who are sworn to serve and protect the public interest. They help to ensure that taxpayers will recoup their investment either in reduced taxes or better and more affordable or accessible health care.
Rather than relying only on the assurance of a theoretical trickle down effect in new jobs, taxpayers and their government can be assured a public benefit from funding non-profit and for profit stem sell research and therapy enterprises.
Such policies also require that grantees must sell their therapies based on reasonable pricing. Taxpayers are becoming increasingly astute and now realize that giving out “free” public money, no matter how well intended, does not result in free or reasonably priced therapies.
These public interests protections ensure that those who come to the public trough or who participate in research or biotech enterprises --- medical professionals, entrepreneurs, and all other stakeholders --- must file disclosure forms with the State of Wisconsin that become a part of the public record. Only such transparency and careful tracking of the money can help all of the actors in this wonderful venture avoid the temptation to violate the public’s trust.
A year ago this writer called for a non-profit, nonpartisan and independent citizen stem cell oversight or watchdog group here in Wisconsin. To date Wisconsin citizens largely have remained silent. It’s now time for Wisconsin citizens to step up to the plate and help meet our responsibility to future generations with family members who suffer from cell-based diseases. (My blog, http://danecountyalmanac.blogspot.com/ will be up soon! Watch for it!)
I urgently call upon our state legislature to come forward now with a policy framework which fully addresses policy and IP safeguards, public benefit requirements, transparency and disclosure practices. Lets not let Wisconsin become a “Johnny come lately” on these public safeguards without which we will surely stumble.
With our governor’s clear goal of capturing one-tenth of the stem-cell market for research and medical therapies by 2015, a new research center about to rise, and heaps of community good will and support we must not miss this opportunity for all Wisconsin citizens to succeed.
Wisconsin State Journal
Guest Column
October 19, 2007
This taxpayer attended the recent Madison Plan Commission’s public hearing on the proposed new Wisconsin Institutes of Discovery.
This project is scheduled to come before our City Council on November 6th. The chosen site on the southwest end of the UW campus has been described as “an unusual marriage of public and private dollars.”
The commingling of public, non-profit and proprietary interests can be rich soil for both a “nimble” and successful collaborative race for stem-based cures and for both jobs and medical therapies for all our citizens.
However without a transparent process and proper policies and safeguards in place multiple conflicts of interest could threaten both our public treasury and trust.
Wisconsin taxpayers and all who will benefit from cell-based medical therapies deserve more than good intentions regardless of how sincere and honorable they may be. Like safe and proven architecture and construction practices, safe and proven policy and intellectual property (IP) models now also exist.
These models are specifically designed to detect and prevent special interest conflicts by groups or individuals who are sworn to serve and protect the public interest. They help to ensure that taxpayers will recoup their investment either in reduced taxes or better and more affordable or accessible health care.
Rather than relying only on the assurance of a theoretical trickle down effect in new jobs, taxpayers and their government can be assured a public benefit from funding non-profit and for profit stem sell research and therapy enterprises.
Such policies also require that grantees must sell their therapies based on reasonable pricing. Taxpayers are becoming increasingly astute and now realize that giving out “free” public money, no matter how well intended, does not result in free or reasonably priced therapies.
These public interests protections ensure that those who come to the public trough or who participate in research or biotech enterprises --- medical professionals, entrepreneurs, and all other stakeholders --- must file disclosure forms with the State of Wisconsin that become a part of the public record. Only such transparency and careful tracking of the money can help all of the actors in this wonderful venture avoid the temptation to violate the public’s trust.
A year ago this writer called for a non-profit, nonpartisan and independent citizen stem cell oversight or watchdog group here in Wisconsin. To date Wisconsin citizens largely have remained silent. It’s now time for Wisconsin citizens to step up to the plate and help meet our responsibility to future generations with family members who suffer from cell-based diseases. (My blog, http://danecountyalmanac.blogspot.com/ will be up soon! Watch for it!)
I urgently call upon our state legislature to come forward now with a policy framework which fully addresses policy and IP safeguards, public benefit requirements, transparency and disclosure practices. Lets not let Wisconsin become a “Johnny come lately” on these public safeguards without which we will surely stumble.
With our governor’s clear goal of capturing one-tenth of the stem-cell market for research and medical therapies by 2015, a new research center about to rise, and heaps of community good will and support we must not miss this opportunity for all Wisconsin citizens to succeed.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Make sure taxpayers get payback from funding stem cell research
Make sure taxpayers get payback from funding stem cell research
By William R. Benedict
The Capital Times Op-Ed
January 17, 2007
In 2006 Doyle helped authorize $50 million in state funding for the University’s planned Wisconsin Institutes for Discovery. This funding by our Wisconsin taxpayers was in part to further jump-start Wisconsin’s still fledgling stem cell research and development initiative.
During this same period Doyle also funded a $5 million plan to recruit and retain stem cell companies; $3 million has gone into Dr. James Thomson’s two companies---Cellular Dynamics, Inc. and Stem Cell Products, Inc.
Steps were also taken to waive Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation’s (WARF) royalty fees for companies that conduct stem cell research in Wisconsin.
All of this funding, mind you, without establishing any terms whatsoever for obtaining any returns on the tax payers’ investment.
Such blatant generosity has been hailed by Jim Haney, executive director, of the Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, as contributing to “a critical mass” that can only be compared to Silicon Valley.
Such hyped-up support has also caused Tom Still, president of the Wisconsin Technology Council, to tout Dr. James Thomson as a possible candidate for the Nobel Prize.
All of this suggests to me that state funding for for-profit stem cell entities in Wisconsin will increase dramatically in the immediate years ahead.
What is most surprising and disheartening is the fact that neither our public servants nor the media have yet shown any willingness whatsoever to assure accountability to the taxpayer for such public funding.
If Wisconsin taxpayers are paying for this research they have the right to expect a reasonable share of the commercial profits and other benefits.
Present promises about the trickle down effect of such state funding is not acceptable. Wisconsin taxpayers have a right to expect both jobs and more affordable health care from their investment.
An example of such deserved fiscal accountability would be: For every publicly funded for-profit stem cell entity that reports yearly revenue of a certain sum or more, i.e. $500,000, there should also be a sum certain payback of some pre-established amount to the tax payer.
Larger and more robust for-profit stem cell entities that report yearly earnings of $500 million or more would pay back the public investor through pre-established royalties.
In addition to these financial returns, for-profit entities that receive public funding can reasonably be expected to make their stem cell therapy products available to uninsured Wisconsin residents consistent with industry standards.
They should also be expected to provide discounted prices to publicly fund health care plans, and to grant Wisconsin residents preference if their stem cell therapies are in short supply.
Wisconsin middle class taxpayers, the uninsured working poor and the sick should not continue to acquiesce and do nothing out of fear and trumped up accusations that such ethically sound taxpayer-centered accountability practices will somehow squash private competition and send our local scientist-entrepreneurs and in-state jobs packing.
Neither should we acquiesce and continue to hold false assurances that best practice standards, intellectual property rights, National Academy of Science policies and ethics, or existing drug pricing controls will somehow now protect the taxpayers’ investment in stem-cell research and the commercial products that will surely follow.
None of these above “safe-guards” have proven effective in the recent past in curbing the flagrant and arrogant abuse of the commercial profit-driven med-tech and pharmaceutical industry.
I am certain that progressive Wisconsin will step up to the plate and meet this responsibility to the taxpayers and to future generations who may have family members who are suffering from cell-based diseases and will be the beneficiary of Wisconsin’s premiere stem cell research and development program.
Now is the time to address and resolve these taxpayer inequities and assure more affordable health care to all of us.
By William R. Benedict
The Capital Times Op-Ed
January 17, 2007
In 2006 Doyle helped authorize $50 million in state funding for the University’s planned Wisconsin Institutes for Discovery. This funding by our Wisconsin taxpayers was in part to further jump-start Wisconsin’s still fledgling stem cell research and development initiative.
During this same period Doyle also funded a $5 million plan to recruit and retain stem cell companies; $3 million has gone into Dr. James Thomson’s two companies---Cellular Dynamics, Inc. and Stem Cell Products, Inc.
Steps were also taken to waive Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation’s (WARF) royalty fees for companies that conduct stem cell research in Wisconsin.
All of this funding, mind you, without establishing any terms whatsoever for obtaining any returns on the tax payers’ investment.
Such blatant generosity has been hailed by Jim Haney, executive director, of the Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, as contributing to “a critical mass” that can only be compared to Silicon Valley.
Such hyped-up support has also caused Tom Still, president of the Wisconsin Technology Council, to tout Dr. James Thomson as a possible candidate for the Nobel Prize.
All of this suggests to me that state funding for for-profit stem cell entities in Wisconsin will increase dramatically in the immediate years ahead.
What is most surprising and disheartening is the fact that neither our public servants nor the media have yet shown any willingness whatsoever to assure accountability to the taxpayer for such public funding.
If Wisconsin taxpayers are paying for this research they have the right to expect a reasonable share of the commercial profits and other benefits.
Present promises about the trickle down effect of such state funding is not acceptable. Wisconsin taxpayers have a right to expect both jobs and more affordable health care from their investment.
An example of such deserved fiscal accountability would be: For every publicly funded for-profit stem cell entity that reports yearly revenue of a certain sum or more, i.e. $500,000, there should also be a sum certain payback of some pre-established amount to the tax payer.
Larger and more robust for-profit stem cell entities that report yearly earnings of $500 million or more would pay back the public investor through pre-established royalties.
In addition to these financial returns, for-profit entities that receive public funding can reasonably be expected to make their stem cell therapy products available to uninsured Wisconsin residents consistent with industry standards.
They should also be expected to provide discounted prices to publicly fund health care plans, and to grant Wisconsin residents preference if their stem cell therapies are in short supply.
Wisconsin middle class taxpayers, the uninsured working poor and the sick should not continue to acquiesce and do nothing out of fear and trumped up accusations that such ethically sound taxpayer-centered accountability practices will somehow squash private competition and send our local scientist-entrepreneurs and in-state jobs packing.
Neither should we acquiesce and continue to hold false assurances that best practice standards, intellectual property rights, National Academy of Science policies and ethics, or existing drug pricing controls will somehow now protect the taxpayers’ investment in stem-cell research and the commercial products that will surely follow.
None of these above “safe-guards” have proven effective in the recent past in curbing the flagrant and arrogant abuse of the commercial profit-driven med-tech and pharmaceutical industry.
I am certain that progressive Wisconsin will step up to the plate and meet this responsibility to the taxpayers and to future generations who may have family members who are suffering from cell-based diseases and will be the beneficiary of Wisconsin’s premiere stem cell research and development program.
Now is the time to address and resolve these taxpayer inequities and assure more affordable health care to all of us.
Payback for Tax Payer Funding Called For
Payback for Tax Payer Funding Called For
Letter to the Editor
On February 13th of this year Governor Doyle will send his proposed $50 billion dollar budget to the legislature. In 2006 Doyle helped authorize $50 million in state funding for the University’s planned Wisconsin Institutes for Discovery. This funding by our Wisconsin taxpayers was in part to further jump-start Wisconsin’s still fledgling stem cell research and development initiative.
During this same period Doyle also funded a $5 million plan to recruit and retain stem cell companies; $3 million has gone into Dr. James Thomson’s two companies---Cellular Dynamics, Inc. and Stem Cell Products, Inc. Steps were also taken to waive Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation’s (WARF) royalty fees for companies that conduct stem cell research in Wisconsin. All of this funding, mind you, without establishing any terms whatsoever for obtaining any returns on the tax payers’ investment.
Such blatant generosity has been hailed by Jim Haney, executive director, of the Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, as contributing to “a critical mass” that can only be compared to Silicon Valley. Such hyped-up support has also caused Tom Still, president of the Wisconsin Technology Council, to tout Dr. James Thomson as a possible candidate for the Nobel Prize.
The print media’s unceasing editorializing about Dr. James Thomson’s “research commercialization model” along with the imperative for ever more public funds to support this model “for a more robust job creation,” all suggest that much is going to be expected from you and I, the taxpayer in the years ahead.
All of this suggests to me that state funding for for-profit stem cell entities in Wisconsin will increase dramatically in the immediate years ahead. What is most surprising and disheartening is the fact that neither our public servants nor the media have yet shown any willingness whatsoever to assure accountability to the taxpayer for such public funding. If Wisconsin taxpayers are paying for this research they have the right to expect a reasonable share of the commercial profits and other benefits.
In addition to direct financial returns or commissions, for-profit entities that receive public funding should reasonably be expected to make their stem cell therapy products available to uninsured Wisconsin residents. They should also be expected to provide discounted prices to publicly fund health care plans, and to grant Wisconsin residents preference if their stem cell therapies are in short supply.
Wisconsin middle class taxpayers, the uninsured working poor and the sick should not continue to acquiesce and do nothing out of fear and trumped up accusations that such ethically sound taxpayer-centered accountability practices will somehow squash private competition and send our local scientist-entrepreneurs and in-state jobs packing.
Wisconsin needs to step up to the plate now and meet this responsibility to the taxpayers and to future generations who suffer from cell-based diseases. Now is the time to address and resolve these taxpayer inequities and assure more affordable health care to all of us.
Respectfully submitted,
William R. Benedict
Letter to the Editor
On February 13th of this year Governor Doyle will send his proposed $50 billion dollar budget to the legislature. In 2006 Doyle helped authorize $50 million in state funding for the University’s planned Wisconsin Institutes for Discovery. This funding by our Wisconsin taxpayers was in part to further jump-start Wisconsin’s still fledgling stem cell research and development initiative.
During this same period Doyle also funded a $5 million plan to recruit and retain stem cell companies; $3 million has gone into Dr. James Thomson’s two companies---Cellular Dynamics, Inc. and Stem Cell Products, Inc. Steps were also taken to waive Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation’s (WARF) royalty fees for companies that conduct stem cell research in Wisconsin. All of this funding, mind you, without establishing any terms whatsoever for obtaining any returns on the tax payers’ investment.
Such blatant generosity has been hailed by Jim Haney, executive director, of the Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, as contributing to “a critical mass” that can only be compared to Silicon Valley. Such hyped-up support has also caused Tom Still, president of the Wisconsin Technology Council, to tout Dr. James Thomson as a possible candidate for the Nobel Prize.
The print media’s unceasing editorializing about Dr. James Thomson’s “research commercialization model” along with the imperative for ever more public funds to support this model “for a more robust job creation,” all suggest that much is going to be expected from you and I, the taxpayer in the years ahead.
All of this suggests to me that state funding for for-profit stem cell entities in Wisconsin will increase dramatically in the immediate years ahead. What is most surprising and disheartening is the fact that neither our public servants nor the media have yet shown any willingness whatsoever to assure accountability to the taxpayer for such public funding. If Wisconsin taxpayers are paying for this research they have the right to expect a reasonable share of the commercial profits and other benefits.
In addition to direct financial returns or commissions, for-profit entities that receive public funding should reasonably be expected to make their stem cell therapy products available to uninsured Wisconsin residents. They should also be expected to provide discounted prices to publicly fund health care plans, and to grant Wisconsin residents preference if their stem cell therapies are in short supply.
Wisconsin middle class taxpayers, the uninsured working poor and the sick should not continue to acquiesce and do nothing out of fear and trumped up accusations that such ethically sound taxpayer-centered accountability practices will somehow squash private competition and send our local scientist-entrepreneurs and in-state jobs packing.
Wisconsin needs to step up to the plate now and meet this responsibility to the taxpayers and to future generations who suffer from cell-based diseases. Now is the time to address and resolve these taxpayer inequities and assure more affordable health care to all of us.
Respectfully submitted,
William R. Benedict
Friday, October 5, 2007
Convergence
A Dane County Almanac
And Other Short Stories
This little book is a revelation of the author’s most intimate feelings
and thoughts about his life on planet earth.
Convergence
August 18, 2005
In recent weeks there has appeared to me such an extreme convergence in my readings which I can only best describe as uncanny. It’s almost like somebody or some thing is taking my hand and carefully leading me along on an unknown journey. If it is not Suzanne referring me to a particular book, then it’s me suddenly discovering exactly what I need in a magazine or newspaper’s articles. It’s as if I am just stepping out into the water, and when I step out a force just in the nick of time places the next stepping stone down in front of me to take the next step. As best as I can determine at this time the most common denominator on my search has to do with life-transitions.
From reading Full Catastrophe Living, I am again introduced to Mindfulness meditation and the rhythmic transitions from breathing in (life) to breathing out (death). This leads me to Matthew Fox and Dying, Resurrection, And Reincarnation. And then, this leads me to read Paul Krafel’s Seeing Nature and I learn how the life process on earth is in a continuous re-cycling mode, as is, I also learn, is the cosmos. It too, like all living things, also undergoes this pattern of living, dying and resurrecting. I learn too that the stars, our sun, supernovas each have their lifetime and then come to an end but not before giving off their progeny. According to the big bang theory, our Solar System is born, including our Planet Earth.
In my last piece – Life on Planet Earth – I referred to Matthew Fox’s perspective of looking to God’s outward or manifest world, mainly to our own planet as one way of better experiencing God’s creation. I cited Paul Krafel’s “Seeing Nature” because in this book he puts the reader in touch, and with much vividness, with what he refers to as the spiraling life cycle of mother earth. He describes how nature maintains its vital balance through a process of constantly rebirthing herself. We talked about “Gaia Hypothesis” and how life is a self revolving and sustaining process which creates and maintains an environment favorable to life.
Today I would like to go back 4.6 billion years ago and share with you what science now knows about how our hot stony planet first generated a nascent life form. Dr. Bruce Jakosky, a geologist at the University of Colorado in Boulder estimates that it was about then that our earth cooled enough to have atmosphere, oceans, and some dry land. In his forthcoming book, “Astrobiology, Science and Society,” Jakosky notes that the rock record is still too sparse to allow us to clearly determine the processes that were associated with the origin of life.
At a recent workshop held in Yellowstone National Park for science writers, researchers described their latest thinking about the origin and development of life on earth. Most briefly, their hypothetical scenario places our earth’s beginning at about 4.6 billion years ago. By between 4.0 and 3.8 billion years ago inorganic molecules (composed of clustered atoms) grew and clotted together into “protocells,” (little bags of chemicals that took in nutrients and discharged wastes) which formed organic compounds needed for early life.
In this pre-biotic stage before living organisms appeared, volcanoes spewed lava and gases rich in hydrogen, sulfur, iron and other minerals. Chemical reactions between hot water and rocks produced more and more complex molecules. From this clumps of inorganic molecules eventually became living cells containing an early version of DNA known as RNA. (DNA contains the instructions to make proteins, the building blocks of every living thing.)
Now I want leave this brief scientific description of the geologic and chemical origin of our planet and return to Paul Krafel, and once again, pick up at the point when after the earth cools, and the oceans and atmosphere makes their appearance, we soon see that out of the algae and moss arises other small plant life. Soon shrubs and small trees appear, along with insects, flowers, toad stools and an abundance of life. From small single cell animals become more complex and advanced mammal forms and ultimately human life
evolves as well.
Life on Planet Earth
And Other Short Stories
This little book is a revelation of the author’s most intimate feelings
and thoughts about his life on planet earth.
Convergence
August 18, 2005
In recent weeks there has appeared to me such an extreme convergence in my readings which I can only best describe as uncanny. It’s almost like somebody or some thing is taking my hand and carefully leading me along on an unknown journey. If it is not Suzanne referring me to a particular book, then it’s me suddenly discovering exactly what I need in a magazine or newspaper’s articles. It’s as if I am just stepping out into the water, and when I step out a force just in the nick of time places the next stepping stone down in front of me to take the next step. As best as I can determine at this time the most common denominator on my search has to do with life-transitions.
From reading Full Catastrophe Living, I am again introduced to Mindfulness meditation and the rhythmic transitions from breathing in (life) to breathing out (death). This leads me to Matthew Fox and Dying, Resurrection, And Reincarnation. And then, this leads me to read Paul Krafel’s Seeing Nature and I learn how the life process on earth is in a continuous re-cycling mode, as is, I also learn, is the cosmos. It too, like all living things, also undergoes this pattern of living, dying and resurrecting. I learn too that the stars, our sun, supernovas each have their lifetime and then come to an end but not before giving off their progeny. According to the big bang theory, our Solar System is born, including our Planet Earth.
In my last piece – Life on Planet Earth – I referred to Matthew Fox’s perspective of looking to God’s outward or manifest world, mainly to our own planet as one way of better experiencing God’s creation. I cited Paul Krafel’s “Seeing Nature” because in this book he puts the reader in touch, and with much vividness, with what he refers to as the spiraling life cycle of mother earth. He describes how nature maintains its vital balance through a process of constantly rebirthing herself. We talked about “Gaia Hypothesis” and how life is a self revolving and sustaining process which creates and maintains an environment favorable to life.
Today I would like to go back 4.6 billion years ago and share with you what science now knows about how our hot stony planet first generated a nascent life form. Dr. Bruce Jakosky, a geologist at the University of Colorado in Boulder estimates that it was about then that our earth cooled enough to have atmosphere, oceans, and some dry land. In his forthcoming book, “Astrobiology, Science and Society,” Jakosky notes that the rock record is still too sparse to allow us to clearly determine the processes that were associated with the origin of life.
At a recent workshop held in Yellowstone National Park for science writers, researchers described their latest thinking about the origin and development of life on earth. Most briefly, their hypothetical scenario places our earth’s beginning at about 4.6 billion years ago. By between 4.0 and 3.8 billion years ago inorganic molecules (composed of clustered atoms) grew and clotted together into “protocells,” (little bags of chemicals that took in nutrients and discharged wastes) which formed organic compounds needed for early life.
In this pre-biotic stage before living organisms appeared, volcanoes spewed lava and gases rich in hydrogen, sulfur, iron and other minerals. Chemical reactions between hot water and rocks produced more and more complex molecules. From this clumps of inorganic molecules eventually became living cells containing an early version of DNA known as RNA. (DNA contains the instructions to make proteins, the building blocks of every living thing.)
Now I want leave this brief scientific description of the geologic and chemical origin of our planet and return to Paul Krafel, and once again, pick up at the point when after the earth cools, and the oceans and atmosphere makes their appearance, we soon see that out of the algae and moss arises other small plant life. Soon shrubs and small trees appear, along with insects, flowers, toad stools and an abundance of life. From small single cell animals become more complex and advanced mammal forms and ultimately human life
evolves as well.
Life on Planet Earth
Monday, October 1, 2007
“Bill's Primer on the Genome”: A book review of the “Genome”
A Dane County Almanac
And Other Short Stories
“Bill's Primer on the Genome”
A book review of the “Genome”
“The fuel on which science runs is ignorance. Science is like a hungry furnace that must be fed logs from the forests of ignorance that surrounds us. In the process, the clearing we call knowledge expands and the longer its perimeter and the more ignorance comes into view.”
Since Matt Ridley wrote the above in his book, “Genome – The Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters,” scientists have devoured gigantic forests of ignorance in mapping the DNA structure of human life. The clearing that this knowledge has produced is greater than any other single scientific breakthrough in human history.
This being the case, it is not surprising that in my journey to more clearly discover my own vision, Ridley’s book is brought into my living room. I recently wrote about reading Brian Swimme’s book, “The Universe Story.” These new scientific cosmologies literally broaden my context and orientation many thousand times over. If you would have asked me just last week whether I would ever discover anything comparable I would have said certainly not. Certainly if one is talking about the macro world, perhaps this would still be my answer. Little did I know that going inward into the micro field of genetics I would find an equal if not even greater discovery?
Soon after settling into the Ridley’s Genome I hesitated. With my limited scientific background, particularly in the biological sciences, will I really be able
journey deep, deep down into the human cell. Could this science journalist write to bring this new micrometer world into my awareness? Just when I was beginning to complain to myself that the author should have included a “gene primer” at the outset, there it was. Incidentally I should note here that I learned later in this book that I may have a gene which serves to motivate me whenever I am puzzled, uncertain or confused. If this is really so, it clearly kicked in when the primer appeared.
From this brief little primer I learned that the human body contains 100 trillion cells. The size of each cell is less than a tenth of a millimeter (or a pin point) across. Inside each of our white cells is a black blob called a nucleus? Inside each nucleus are two complete sets of the human genome. Each genome set contains 30,000 to 80,000 genes on the same twenty-three chromosomes. Before the discovery of the genome we did not know there was a document at the heart of every cell three billion letters long of whose contents we knew nothing.
What came next seemed almost too good to be true. I learned that the author will use a book as a metaphor to explain all I will need to know in order to understand his entire book. Immediately I remembered some early advice that my father gave me when I was less than ten years old.
He said, “Bill. If you really want to get an education or become a scholar, all you really need to know is how to read. Once you learn to read, you will be able to learn anything there is to learn.” These words acted to motivate me to want to read everything the author had to say about the human gene.
In the author’s book metaphor there are twenty-three “chapters,” for the twenty-three human chromosomes. Each chapter contains several thousand “stories” called genes. Each story or gene is made up of “paragraphs,” called exons, which area interpreted by “advertisements” called introns. Each paragraph is made up of “words” called codons. Each word is written in “letters” called bases. The Gerome book is written with only three letter words, and using only four letters: A, C, G, T. DNA is a chemical and RNA is also a chemical. Genetics is really just this simple! Before the discovery of the genome, we did not know there was a document at the heart of every cell three billion letters long of whose contents we knew nothing.
Continuing to use the book metaphor, I learn that this “book” can photocopy (or replicate) and read itself. A single strand of DNA can copy itself. The code is written not on paper but on long chains of sugar and phosphate called DNA molecules. There are one million codons (words) in the human genome. Everything in the body is made from protein. Every protein is a gene. The body’s chemical reactions are catalyzed by proteins known as enzymes. I learned that when genes are replicated mistakes are sometimes made or a mutation occurs. There are 64 different codons or words and many of these words the same meaning.
With the genome there are 4,000 million years of earth history and five million species. One of these five million species is a conscious human being. Consider also for a moment, that among the 6 thousand million people that has been on the planet, you and I were privileged enough to be born in the country where the “word” (DNA structure) was discovered. It was during our short lifetime that the greatest, simplest, and most surprising secret in the universe was discovered. Our DNA is a recipe or instructions on how to replicate me and you. It’s a message written in a code of chemicals – one chemical for each letter. Chromosomes are large molecules designed to carry our heredity.
DNA are not merely structurally important but functionally active substances in determining the biochemical activities and specific characteristics of cells, and that by a means known as chemical substance it is possible to induce predictable and hereditary changes in cells. Life, to a rough approximation, consists of three atoms - hydrogen, carbon and oxygen. They make up 98% of all atoms in living beings.
Finally, and this will be the end my genetic understanding to date, I want to distinguish between two chemicals, protein and DNA. A protein consists of chemistry, living, breathing, metabolism and behavior. It is what biologists call the phenotype. DNA consists of information, replication breeding, and sex, and is what biologists call the genotype.
Does the existence of the Genome now mean that it will be only a few years before scientists create a genetically modified human being? After all we already have a cloned sheep. Is our genetic make-up the primary determinant of our free will as humans?
The author of Genome puts it this way. “The crude distinction between genes as implacable programmers of a Calvinists predestination and the environment as the home of liberal free will is a fallacy.” Ridley argues that if genes can affect behavior and behavior can affect genes, then the causality is clearly circular and not single-dimensional.
Paradoxically, our genes, because they are unique to each of us, are perhaps our greatest protection against the many determining threats that face us daily. These many wide and varied determinate conditions include both genetic and environmental. We have the most to fear from the latter and it is the most pervasive.
Again, Ridley says it best. “Freedom lies in expressing your own determinism, not somebody else’s. It is not the determinism that makes the difference, but the ownership. If freedom is what we prefer, then it is preferable to be determined by forces that originate in ourselves and not in others. Part of our own revulsion at cloning originates in the fear that what is uniquely ours could be shared by another. The single-minded obsession of the genes to do the determining in their own bodies is our strongest bulwark against loss of freedom to external causes.
We know that there is no single gene for free will in the genome. Rather there is something infinitely more uplifting and magnificent: a whole human nature, flexibly preordained in our chromosomes and idiosyncratic to each of us. Everybody has a unique and different nature.
And Other Short Stories
“Bill's Primer on the Genome”
A book review of the “Genome”
“The fuel on which science runs is ignorance. Science is like a hungry furnace that must be fed logs from the forests of ignorance that surrounds us. In the process, the clearing we call knowledge expands and the longer its perimeter and the more ignorance comes into view.”
Since Matt Ridley wrote the above in his book, “Genome – The Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters,” scientists have devoured gigantic forests of ignorance in mapping the DNA structure of human life. The clearing that this knowledge has produced is greater than any other single scientific breakthrough in human history.
This being the case, it is not surprising that in my journey to more clearly discover my own vision, Ridley’s book is brought into my living room. I recently wrote about reading Brian Swimme’s book, “The Universe Story.” These new scientific cosmologies literally broaden my context and orientation many thousand times over. If you would have asked me just last week whether I would ever discover anything comparable I would have said certainly not. Certainly if one is talking about the macro world, perhaps this would still be my answer. Little did I know that going inward into the micro field of genetics I would find an equal if not even greater discovery?
Soon after settling into the Ridley’s Genome I hesitated. With my limited scientific background, particularly in the biological sciences, will I really be able
journey deep, deep down into the human cell. Could this science journalist write to bring this new micrometer world into my awareness? Just when I was beginning to complain to myself that the author should have included a “gene primer” at the outset, there it was. Incidentally I should note here that I learned later in this book that I may have a gene which serves to motivate me whenever I am puzzled, uncertain or confused. If this is really so, it clearly kicked in when the primer appeared.
From this brief little primer I learned that the human body contains 100 trillion cells. The size of each cell is less than a tenth of a millimeter (or a pin point) across. Inside each of our white cells is a black blob called a nucleus? Inside each nucleus are two complete sets of the human genome. Each genome set contains 30,000 to 80,000 genes on the same twenty-three chromosomes. Before the discovery of the genome we did not know there was a document at the heart of every cell three billion letters long of whose contents we knew nothing.
What came next seemed almost too good to be true. I learned that the author will use a book as a metaphor to explain all I will need to know in order to understand his entire book. Immediately I remembered some early advice that my father gave me when I was less than ten years old.
He said, “Bill. If you really want to get an education or become a scholar, all you really need to know is how to read. Once you learn to read, you will be able to learn anything there is to learn.” These words acted to motivate me to want to read everything the author had to say about the human gene.
In the author’s book metaphor there are twenty-three “chapters,” for the twenty-three human chromosomes. Each chapter contains several thousand “stories” called genes. Each story or gene is made up of “paragraphs,” called exons, which area interpreted by “advertisements” called introns. Each paragraph is made up of “words” called codons. Each word is written in “letters” called bases. The Gerome book is written with only three letter words, and using only four letters: A, C, G, T. DNA is a chemical and RNA is also a chemical. Genetics is really just this simple! Before the discovery of the genome, we did not know there was a document at the heart of every cell three billion letters long of whose contents we knew nothing.
Continuing to use the book metaphor, I learn that this “book” can photocopy (or replicate) and read itself. A single strand of DNA can copy itself. The code is written not on paper but on long chains of sugar and phosphate called DNA molecules. There are one million codons (words) in the human genome. Everything in the body is made from protein. Every protein is a gene. The body’s chemical reactions are catalyzed by proteins known as enzymes. I learned that when genes are replicated mistakes are sometimes made or a mutation occurs. There are 64 different codons or words and many of these words the same meaning.
With the genome there are 4,000 million years of earth history and five million species. One of these five million species is a conscious human being. Consider also for a moment, that among the 6 thousand million people that has been on the planet, you and I were privileged enough to be born in the country where the “word” (DNA structure) was discovered. It was during our short lifetime that the greatest, simplest, and most surprising secret in the universe was discovered. Our DNA is a recipe or instructions on how to replicate me and you. It’s a message written in a code of chemicals – one chemical for each letter. Chromosomes are large molecules designed to carry our heredity.
DNA are not merely structurally important but functionally active substances in determining the biochemical activities and specific characteristics of cells, and that by a means known as chemical substance it is possible to induce predictable and hereditary changes in cells. Life, to a rough approximation, consists of three atoms - hydrogen, carbon and oxygen. They make up 98% of all atoms in living beings.
Finally, and this will be the end my genetic understanding to date, I want to distinguish between two chemicals, protein and DNA. A protein consists of chemistry, living, breathing, metabolism and behavior. It is what biologists call the phenotype. DNA consists of information, replication breeding, and sex, and is what biologists call the genotype.
Does the existence of the Genome now mean that it will be only a few years before scientists create a genetically modified human being? After all we already have a cloned sheep. Is our genetic make-up the primary determinant of our free will as humans?
The author of Genome puts it this way. “The crude distinction between genes as implacable programmers of a Calvinists predestination and the environment as the home of liberal free will is a fallacy.” Ridley argues that if genes can affect behavior and behavior can affect genes, then the causality is clearly circular and not single-dimensional.
Paradoxically, our genes, because they are unique to each of us, are perhaps our greatest protection against the many determining threats that face us daily. These many wide and varied determinate conditions include both genetic and environmental. We have the most to fear from the latter and it is the most pervasive.
Again, Ridley says it best. “Freedom lies in expressing your own determinism, not somebody else’s. It is not the determinism that makes the difference, but the ownership. If freedom is what we prefer, then it is preferable to be determined by forces that originate in ourselves and not in others. Part of our own revulsion at cloning originates in the fear that what is uniquely ours could be shared by another. The single-minded obsession of the genes to do the determining in their own bodies is our strongest bulwark against loss of freedom to external causes.
We know that there is no single gene for free will in the genome. Rather there is something infinitely more uplifting and magnificent: a whole human nature, flexibly preordained in our chromosomes and idiosyncratic to each of us. Everybody has a unique and different nature.
Saturday, September 29, 2007
Some Musings about the Small Group
Have you ever made bread from adding liquid with flour and other ingredients such as salt, shortening and yeast? Small groups go through a similar fermentation period eventually maturing into a full blown and living group culture. Webster’s New World Dictionary describes a small group as “a number of persons gathered closely together and forming a recognizable unit.” The social psychologist would add that the group’s birth is dependent upon at least three members in regular interaction over time. The group’s active life is at stake whenever member attendance begins to decrease.
Is a social group, then, a living organism? Like humans, a group also goes through a life-cycle. Like us, groups have early, middle and late stages of development. Each group’s development undergoes a series of changes. Also, like humans, most groups also have a life expectancy. The group members, when in regular interaction, literally make up the life-blood of the social group. Webster actually defines the word “life” or “living” as “to have a wide variety of social/group experiences.” Life is also defined as “the activities of a given time or in a given setting and the people who take part in them.” Between the beginning of the group and its ending, like a human, there is indeed life in the group.
Some would even argue that groups also have a spirit or soul. The group’s life is carried on in the individual members’ consciousness or subconscious, often long after the active phase of the group as ceased. In this very real sense the spirit of the group endures far beyond its active or living state. One can argue that as long as three or more members continue to consciously hold in their mind the group’s memory, actions and values, the group’s spirit lives on. Robert Merton and other sociologists refer to this phenomenon as a person’s significant reference groups.
One’s group membership in this sense never fully ends and its imprint on the member continues throughout life. Social psychologists would argue that it is the series of group affiliations throughout our lives that truly make us human. Life in a group changes the human being. Members are never quite the same after they have experienced membership in a small group.
This group’s formation process begins when the members convene their very first meeting and ends when the very last meeting is held former group members, long after the last meeting, continue to carry that group’s unique culture and character on throughout their life. When new members first convene there is excitement, often near elation, on the part of its members. Expectations are high. The group’s early phase can also be described like fruit and other growing things as ripening, budding, blooming, flourishing, and later shedding and decaying.
So you have decided to join a small group. Joining a new group is like starting kindergarten all over again. New faces, new rules and new situations. Joining a new small group can sometimes really be a bummer. Suddenly, after being relatively satisfied and comfortable in your existing family and work groups you must begin all over again in a strange land and learn a new small group culture and language. When one joins a new group they first must decide to give up some time with their existing group affiliations at home, work and in the larger community.
Joining a small group induces self-examination, renegotiation and a temporary retreat from other already enduring social relationships. Membership in a group is also about both growth and regression. After all you will now become a new and different person. Many of your group experiences will vicariously be shared with your friends and family members. In fact it may be that your closest family member or friend will see your new membership as ranging from mild annoyance to “a pain in the ass” if you will pardon my expression.
Joining a group is always a seductive new adventure. One imagines new friends, opportunities and experiences. Members agree to commit themselves and especially their time to the group’s purpose and goals. There is a mutual social contract which also requires that the members give their time and energy to the new group over a sustained period. Members often see the new group as an opportunity to explore issues of both deep personal and social concern and interest.
Joining a new group can be as strange and exciting as your first bicycle ride. There is the fear of uncertainty and failure, of possibly proving to be incompetent, and feelings of ambivalence and perhaps initial second thoughts of “who really needs this?”
For many the desire to join and participate in a small group over a period of one or two years is the result of an awareness of a need for radical change in some critical aspects of one’s life. Joining a small group may represent a general dissatisfaction with existing group affiliations or with your present lifestyle.
Small group membership is a perilous journey with many roadblocks and mine fields but also with opportunities and delights along the way. Joining a small group can be compared to an older adult who returns to school after a long absence. After functioning quite well in her many social roles she may suddenly find a strange disequilibrium and confusion.
Have you ever thought about what effect your membership will have on your family and others? New members do not always realize how their commitment and time apart from family and friends will be viewed by others.
Members may need to give up certain evenings and weekends with their loved ones to this strange new group. Both parties can expect to experience stress on the home front as the new member learns to divide her energy between her new group and existing demands.
After all you are suddenly incorporating new “family-like” members into your life. It’s fair to say that in many respects you have just added a dozen or more new siblings to your larger “family.” You now have another small family-like group but with a totally different culture – new house rules, new expectations and values, new affections and repulsions. You have journeyed into a new territory.
Therefore it will be perfectly natural for you to experience levels of stress and anxiety as you pass through these various stages and crises of any new group. For example we can expect at least one or more members will be subject to some form of scape-goating during the life of the group. After all with each new relationship each member can be seen as lying somewhere along a “deviance scale” of one to ten when compared with your existing repertoire of relationships.
All human groups and group members experience natural cycles that affect both group morale and individual member feelings. This is best illustrated by what is known as the “Meninger Morale Curve” which follows a set pattern. It simply states that there will likely be a periodic change in the morale and feeling of group members over time due to three kinds of “crises” inherent in the group’s development. Initially, morale tends to be somewhat elevated due to the hopes, expectations, and dreams of those who have expended their time and energy to join the group.
As the realities of the group’s purpose and goals and competing demands on the member’s time become clear, including the limited resources and so on, this involvement often produces a depressing skid downward. Nothing is quite as good as it initially appears.
Nonetheless, a reasonable well functioning group can manage to pull itself up by accepting and confronting the challenges and mobilizing its energy. The third or final downturn is produced by the approaching end of the group and the inevitable separation. This up and down process often blocks the members’ initial optimistic and rational expectations concerning group development. Small group members must learn to be adventurous and take risks during these downward spirals and be prepared to support or “buck-up” individual members when their spirits naturally begin to sag.
With a new group the new member naturally must change her existing activity pattern. She will expend considerable time and energy trying to redefine herself with both her existing groups and her new group. One’s old lifestyle is now changed and old routines and expectations are now forever altered. You will never be quite the same person!
Especially in the early stages of the group, members begin to critically assess the other members capacities both for their ability to gratify their own personal interests and needs as well as the extent that each can meet the welfare and needs of the larger group. How does each member measure up and what will be expected of me?
The risk of messing things up abounds on the part of every member in this new enterprise. To expect maturity and competence from each member, while allowing a measure of regression for each, is always a challenging and vital balance. Membership is always a delicate balance between support and challenge. In every new group experience each member asks herself to what degree will I risk myself while also encouraging others around me the same opportunities to grow?
If at the close of the group experience members can see that some of their original expectations for the group have been met, then the group has been a success.
I began these remarks by comparing the development of a small group to making bread. I would like to conclude by expanding on this analogy by calling attention to the complexity and diversity of small groups. When members interact they must simultaneously adjust their behavior to each individual in the group as well as to the group as a whole. This often makes for a very lively and exciting experience for all. Just like good bread requires the right blending of liquid, flour, yeast, salt, shortening, and perhaps some special spices, groups too, in order to create a viable and creative group culture, need all the diverse personality traits, talents, and energy that we as members can bring to the table.
Is a social group, then, a living organism? Like humans, a group also goes through a life-cycle. Like us, groups have early, middle and late stages of development. Each group’s development undergoes a series of changes. Also, like humans, most groups also have a life expectancy. The group members, when in regular interaction, literally make up the life-blood of the social group. Webster actually defines the word “life” or “living” as “to have a wide variety of social/group experiences.” Life is also defined as “the activities of a given time or in a given setting and the people who take part in them.” Between the beginning of the group and its ending, like a human, there is indeed life in the group.
Some would even argue that groups also have a spirit or soul. The group’s life is carried on in the individual members’ consciousness or subconscious, often long after the active phase of the group as ceased. In this very real sense the spirit of the group endures far beyond its active or living state. One can argue that as long as three or more members continue to consciously hold in their mind the group’s memory, actions and values, the group’s spirit lives on. Robert Merton and other sociologists refer to this phenomenon as a person’s significant reference groups.
One’s group membership in this sense never fully ends and its imprint on the member continues throughout life. Social psychologists would argue that it is the series of group affiliations throughout our lives that truly make us human. Life in a group changes the human being. Members are never quite the same after they have experienced membership in a small group.
This group’s formation process begins when the members convene their very first meeting and ends when the very last meeting is held former group members, long after the last meeting, continue to carry that group’s unique culture and character on throughout their life. When new members first convene there is excitement, often near elation, on the part of its members. Expectations are high. The group’s early phase can also be described like fruit and other growing things as ripening, budding, blooming, flourishing, and later shedding and decaying.
So you have decided to join a small group. Joining a new group is like starting kindergarten all over again. New faces, new rules and new situations. Joining a new small group can sometimes really be a bummer. Suddenly, after being relatively satisfied and comfortable in your existing family and work groups you must begin all over again in a strange land and learn a new small group culture and language. When one joins a new group they first must decide to give up some time with their existing group affiliations at home, work and in the larger community.
Joining a small group induces self-examination, renegotiation and a temporary retreat from other already enduring social relationships. Membership in a group is also about both growth and regression. After all you will now become a new and different person. Many of your group experiences will vicariously be shared with your friends and family members. In fact it may be that your closest family member or friend will see your new membership as ranging from mild annoyance to “a pain in the ass” if you will pardon my expression.
Joining a group is always a seductive new adventure. One imagines new friends, opportunities and experiences. Members agree to commit themselves and especially their time to the group’s purpose and goals. There is a mutual social contract which also requires that the members give their time and energy to the new group over a sustained period. Members often see the new group as an opportunity to explore issues of both deep personal and social concern and interest.
Joining a new group can be as strange and exciting as your first bicycle ride. There is the fear of uncertainty and failure, of possibly proving to be incompetent, and feelings of ambivalence and perhaps initial second thoughts of “who really needs this?”
For many the desire to join and participate in a small group over a period of one or two years is the result of an awareness of a need for radical change in some critical aspects of one’s life. Joining a small group may represent a general dissatisfaction with existing group affiliations or with your present lifestyle.
Small group membership is a perilous journey with many roadblocks and mine fields but also with opportunities and delights along the way. Joining a small group can be compared to an older adult who returns to school after a long absence. After functioning quite well in her many social roles she may suddenly find a strange disequilibrium and confusion.
Have you ever thought about what effect your membership will have on your family and others? New members do not always realize how their commitment and time apart from family and friends will be viewed by others.
Members may need to give up certain evenings and weekends with their loved ones to this strange new group. Both parties can expect to experience stress on the home front as the new member learns to divide her energy between her new group and existing demands.
After all you are suddenly incorporating new “family-like” members into your life. It’s fair to say that in many respects you have just added a dozen or more new siblings to your larger “family.” You now have another small family-like group but with a totally different culture – new house rules, new expectations and values, new affections and repulsions. You have journeyed into a new territory.
Therefore it will be perfectly natural for you to experience levels of stress and anxiety as you pass through these various stages and crises of any new group. For example we can expect at least one or more members will be subject to some form of scape-goating during the life of the group. After all with each new relationship each member can be seen as lying somewhere along a “deviance scale” of one to ten when compared with your existing repertoire of relationships.
All human groups and group members experience natural cycles that affect both group morale and individual member feelings. This is best illustrated by what is known as the “Meninger Morale Curve” which follows a set pattern. It simply states that there will likely be a periodic change in the morale and feeling of group members over time due to three kinds of “crises” inherent in the group’s development. Initially, morale tends to be somewhat elevated due to the hopes, expectations, and dreams of those who have expended their time and energy to join the group.
As the realities of the group’s purpose and goals and competing demands on the member’s time become clear, including the limited resources and so on, this involvement often produces a depressing skid downward. Nothing is quite as good as it initially appears.
Nonetheless, a reasonable well functioning group can manage to pull itself up by accepting and confronting the challenges and mobilizing its energy. The third or final downturn is produced by the approaching end of the group and the inevitable separation. This up and down process often blocks the members’ initial optimistic and rational expectations concerning group development. Small group members must learn to be adventurous and take risks during these downward spirals and be prepared to support or “buck-up” individual members when their spirits naturally begin to sag.
With a new group the new member naturally must change her existing activity pattern. She will expend considerable time and energy trying to redefine herself with both her existing groups and her new group. One’s old lifestyle is now changed and old routines and expectations are now forever altered. You will never be quite the same person!
Especially in the early stages of the group, members begin to critically assess the other members capacities both for their ability to gratify their own personal interests and needs as well as the extent that each can meet the welfare and needs of the larger group. How does each member measure up and what will be expected of me?
The risk of messing things up abounds on the part of every member in this new enterprise. To expect maturity and competence from each member, while allowing a measure of regression for each, is always a challenging and vital balance. Membership is always a delicate balance between support and challenge. In every new group experience each member asks herself to what degree will I risk myself while also encouraging others around me the same opportunities to grow?
If at the close of the group experience members can see that some of their original expectations for the group have been met, then the group has been a success.
I began these remarks by comparing the development of a small group to making bread. I would like to conclude by expanding on this analogy by calling attention to the complexity and diversity of small groups. When members interact they must simultaneously adjust their behavior to each individual in the group as well as to the group as a whole. This often makes for a very lively and exciting experience for all. Just like good bread requires the right blending of liquid, flour, yeast, salt, shortening, and perhaps some special spices, groups too, in order to create a viable and creative group culture, need all the diverse personality traits, talents, and energy that we as members can bring to the table.
The Left Hand of God - A Book Review
Chapter 3
“The Voice of Fear and the Voice of Hope”
Rabbi Michael Lerner has written a book entitled, The Left Hand of God---Taking Back our Country From the Religious Right. In Chapter 3, The Voice of Fear and the Voice of Hope, pages 77-92, he writes about two world views.
The first world view he describes, he calls the Right Hand of God. It is the view of fear, isolation and selfishness. The Left Hand of God he refers to as generosity and hope. The former he also refers to as the Cynical Realism view, and the latter as the Spiritually Conscious view.
Cynical Realism views each of us as looking after ourselves as we try to keep an advantage over all others. In fact this fear of others is considered just plain common sense. This is also the state of “heightened alert and fear.”
The Spiritually Conscious view, on the other hand, sees the human being as one who desires a loving connection with others and seeks ways to cooperate with one another. He or she is most fulfilled when we are needed by others and can provide generously to others. He or she feels that their state is intrinsically bound to all others. This state of consciousness Learner calls the “heightened generosity and hope.”
These two world views can also be seen as two opposite paradigms or cultures. The culture of hope is often viewed by the Cynical Realists as being “out of touch with reality, and just plain nonsense. These two world views can be viewed as existing on two opposite poles and on a continuum. Along this continuum at any given time in our history social, political and spiritual energy flows or oscillates back and forth between these two poles. During the Great Depression of 1929, The Joe McCarthy era, the Cold War, and more recently 9/11 Americans adopted a state of fear mentality. This can best be seen in the color codes and alerts, the suspicion, the spying and the assigning certain groups and nations with divine rights, and the others as part of the evil empire.
In contrast during the New Deal and the Civil Rights Movement eras the spirit of hope and generosity reigned. In this culture of hope and greater solidarity all humans are treated as being in this divine image and in our essence as all being good. We are gentle and compassionate with one another. We believe that evil and injustice can be overcome and that we need not to live in fear. We believe in the continuous transformation for a greater good for all. God commands us to pursue justice. God is caring and generous and so are we.
In the culture of fear, God is seen as an all powerful Warrior with a Strong Right Hand and strong judgment and combativeness.
Which view we choose to take is influenced by the following factors:
1. Our family legacy
2. The socialization process that we experienced at school and in our neighborhood
3. Our current life situation, i.e., do we feel left out, estranged, alienated, discriminated against, etc..
4. Our religious beliefs
5. Current popular ideas, i.e., the media, Hollywood, etc.
6. How the people closest around us act.
We can use this fear vs. hope paradigm to assess any phenomenon in our lives, including our own campaign finance reform project: Do public funded political campaigns create more generosity, goodness and compassion in this world, than privately funded campaigns? Which one is more likely to produce power over and which one will more likely produce power sharing with others? Will the marriage referendum bring about a greater generosity and hope for all or will it further isolate and create barriers to our democracy?
We can use the fear/hope or faith standard to assess the effect of a TV show, a sermon or speech, a movie, a news story, a commercial or advertisement, and a small group meeting like our own.
As a further standard or screening device, I would add here our own moral values. For example, we can use Talcott Parsons’ five pattern variables: Self vs. the larger collectivity; our family or tribe vs. more universalistic values; one’s performance and achievement vs. the diffuse quality of the person; seeing people narrowly for what they can do for us or more diffusely as divine beings; and seeing people only economically and rationally or also with feelings, or affectivity vs. affectivity neutrality.
At the small group level or at the nation state level we can survey the four functional requirements or functions and choose the more just direction.
1. Do we wish to spiral outward into the larger community and participate as full citizens in an ever more inclusive democracy or do we wish to assume a more insular and parochial role in our in-group or nation state?
2. Do we wish to participate in goal achievement as equals or should we abdicate or rights and influence to the elites of this world.
3. Do we wish to recognize the worth and divinity in each of us and see each person as a multidimensional and complex human being or only as a consumer or employee?
4. Are we to be satisfied within the narrow solidarity of our own special group or nation/state or do we wish to play a larger and more integrative and inclusive role in this universe?
“The Voice of Fear and the Voice of Hope”
Rabbi Michael Lerner has written a book entitled, The Left Hand of God---Taking Back our Country From the Religious Right. In Chapter 3, The Voice of Fear and the Voice of Hope, pages 77-92, he writes about two world views.
The first world view he describes, he calls the Right Hand of God. It is the view of fear, isolation and selfishness. The Left Hand of God he refers to as generosity and hope. The former he also refers to as the Cynical Realism view, and the latter as the Spiritually Conscious view.
Cynical Realism views each of us as looking after ourselves as we try to keep an advantage over all others. In fact this fear of others is considered just plain common sense. This is also the state of “heightened alert and fear.”
The Spiritually Conscious view, on the other hand, sees the human being as one who desires a loving connection with others and seeks ways to cooperate with one another. He or she is most fulfilled when we are needed by others and can provide generously to others. He or she feels that their state is intrinsically bound to all others. This state of consciousness Learner calls the “heightened generosity and hope.”
These two world views can also be seen as two opposite paradigms or cultures. The culture of hope is often viewed by the Cynical Realists as being “out of touch with reality, and just plain nonsense. These two world views can be viewed as existing on two opposite poles and on a continuum. Along this continuum at any given time in our history social, political and spiritual energy flows or oscillates back and forth between these two poles. During the Great Depression of 1929, The Joe McCarthy era, the Cold War, and more recently 9/11 Americans adopted a state of fear mentality. This can best be seen in the color codes and alerts, the suspicion, the spying and the assigning certain groups and nations with divine rights, and the others as part of the evil empire.
In contrast during the New Deal and the Civil Rights Movement eras the spirit of hope and generosity reigned. In this culture of hope and greater solidarity all humans are treated as being in this divine image and in our essence as all being good. We are gentle and compassionate with one another. We believe that evil and injustice can be overcome and that we need not to live in fear. We believe in the continuous transformation for a greater good for all. God commands us to pursue justice. God is caring and generous and so are we.
In the culture of fear, God is seen as an all powerful Warrior with a Strong Right Hand and strong judgment and combativeness.
Which view we choose to take is influenced by the following factors:
1. Our family legacy
2. The socialization process that we experienced at school and in our neighborhood
3. Our current life situation, i.e., do we feel left out, estranged, alienated, discriminated against, etc..
4. Our religious beliefs
5. Current popular ideas, i.e., the media, Hollywood, etc.
6. How the people closest around us act.
We can use this fear vs. hope paradigm to assess any phenomenon in our lives, including our own campaign finance reform project: Do public funded political campaigns create more generosity, goodness and compassion in this world, than privately funded campaigns? Which one is more likely to produce power over and which one will more likely produce power sharing with others? Will the marriage referendum bring about a greater generosity and hope for all or will it further isolate and create barriers to our democracy?
We can use the fear/hope or faith standard to assess the effect of a TV show, a sermon or speech, a movie, a news story, a commercial or advertisement, and a small group meeting like our own.
As a further standard or screening device, I would add here our own moral values. For example, we can use Talcott Parsons’ five pattern variables: Self vs. the larger collectivity; our family or tribe vs. more universalistic values; one’s performance and achievement vs. the diffuse quality of the person; seeing people narrowly for what they can do for us or more diffusely as divine beings; and seeing people only economically and rationally or also with feelings, or affectivity vs. affectivity neutrality.
At the small group level or at the nation state level we can survey the four functional requirements or functions and choose the more just direction.
1. Do we wish to spiral outward into the larger community and participate as full citizens in an ever more inclusive democracy or do we wish to assume a more insular and parochial role in our in-group or nation state?
2. Do we wish to participate in goal achievement as equals or should we abdicate or rights and influence to the elites of this world.
3. Do we wish to recognize the worth and divinity in each of us and see each person as a multidimensional and complex human being or only as a consumer or employee?
4. Are we to be satisfied within the narrow solidarity of our own special group or nation/state or do we wish to play a larger and more integrative and inclusive role in this universe?
Thursday, September 27, 2007
I Had a Dream Last Night
- I dreamed of a day when the average citizen will be able to have equal time with her legislator, and corporate executives and lobbyists will have to wait their turn.
- I dreamed that it’s now common practice for all state and national political campaigns to be fully funded out of our state and federal budget.
- I dreamed that someday soon, talk of the “public interest” will no longer be empty rhetoric or a joke at our State Capitol.
- I dreamed of the day when candidates will spend all their time debating the issues in stead of raising corporate and special interest dollars in order to hold on to their seat.
- I dreamed of a day when my grand children will grow up and be able to run for public office without placing their family’s lively hood in jeopardy.
- I dreamed of a day when the people of Wisconsin will take back their democratic institutions from corporate and special interests.
- I dreamed of a day when once again a public safety net will be placed snugly around each of our children regardless of their parents’ economic status.
- I dreamed that America will begin to value people for more than what they can earn or achieve but also for who they are.
- I dreamed that America will begin to develop universal values that transcend our own personal, state and national interests and begin to consider the interests of all of life.
- I dreamed that it’s now common practice for all state and national political campaigns to be fully funded out of our state and federal budget.
- I dreamed that someday soon, talk of the “public interest” will no longer be empty rhetoric or a joke at our State Capitol.
- I dreamed of the day when candidates will spend all their time debating the issues in stead of raising corporate and special interest dollars in order to hold on to their seat.
- I dreamed of a day when my grand children will grow up and be able to run for public office without placing their family’s lively hood in jeopardy.
- I dreamed of a day when the people of Wisconsin will take back their democratic institutions from corporate and special interests.
- I dreamed of a day when once again a public safety net will be placed snugly around each of our children regardless of their parents’ economic status.
- I dreamed that America will begin to value people for more than what they can earn or achieve but also for who they are.
- I dreamed that America will begin to develop universal values that transcend our own personal, state and national interests and begin to consider the interests of all of life.
A New Land Use Ethic Needed
The Journal’s Friday editorial – “Take aim at safe, productive hunting” - it seems to me was one sided and missed the mark. The Journal confused the reader by pairing a discussion of hunter gun safety with the tragic trespassing incident of just a year ago. It chose to deny and ignore the real problems which had to do with trespassing and the need for greater civility on the part of both hunter and land owner. While the Journal article is correct that there is a declining pattern in hunting gun safety incidents, it missed both the opportunity and a critical public need to speak to the real issue – more and more hunters with less and less non-congested space to hunt in. It failed to mention the fact that the number of private property incursions is steadily rising.
The real problem is more hunters and an ever increasing number of smaller private property holdings creating more boundaries to cross, combined with an outdated land use ethic that encourages confrontation, exclusivity and elitism. What is called for is a land use ethic which emphasizes mutual respect and trust on the part of both the hunter and the landowner. It calls for greater camaraderie and compassion and less and less focus on both actors’ differences. The hunter and the landowner are both special in their common love of respect for mother earth. That is the bond that can bring both land owner and hunter together in the years ahead.
The real problem is more hunters and an ever increasing number of smaller private property holdings creating more boundaries to cross, combined with an outdated land use ethic that encourages confrontation, exclusivity and elitism. What is called for is a land use ethic which emphasizes mutual respect and trust on the part of both the hunter and the landowner. It calls for greater camaraderie and compassion and less and less focus on both actors’ differences. The hunter and the landowner are both special in their common love of respect for mother earth. That is the bond that can bring both land owner and hunter together in the years ahead.
When Will We Ever Learn?
As I read my newspaper this week a song lyric kept coming to my mind. “Why won’t they ever learn?” I read three articles: the serious food pantry shortage, the West Virginia mine tragedy and about the recent chanting incident at East High School. The food pantry article reported that it’s been a hard year for private food pantry officials. It then went on to give a litany of reasons why this was so. Starting with acts of God, citing hurricanes and earthquakes resulting in public “donor fatigue.” It then went on to report the household “food insecurity” index which has risen thirteen percent since 1999.
The article then speculated that perhaps this food shortage was due to a “weakness in the economy” and the heating/energy crisis. As I read on I began to wonder to whom and why this news was being reported and why the reporter failed to say a word about “welfare reform” --- the federal governments retreat from the family entitlement program ---a much needed safety net for the poor children in this country.
Was the article intended to give succor or assuage the guilt of the American people for increasingly allowing the poor children of this country to go hungry and cold throughout another winter? How would this article relieve the pain and suffering of one third of our children?
It seems that now that the poor single mothers “have got their act together and have learned how to wind an alarm clock,” and now that our government has withdrawn its “handouts” that we are no longer able to blame the poor families of this country. It now seems to be in vogue to blame God and our economy. “Oh, when will we ever learn?”
Who could not feel sad and mourn for the thirteen miners who died, and the one now in a deep coma, and their families? One follow-up news article informed the reader about the upcoming investigation and speculated about the likely causes of the explosion. Here again God was called forth in the form of “lighting” and perhaps a faulty ventilation system as the most likely culprits. No mention was made of all the mining company’s safety violations or that it was a non-union company.
We were assured however that the Mine Safety and Health Administration officials were on the job and justice would be done. Not in this article, or any of the earlier articles, or on the talk shows I listened to about this incident, was it reported that this was a non-union mine. None of the miners’ families mentioned this ---probably out of fear of other family members losing their jobs. “Oh, when will we ever learn?
Finally, I read about the high school students who at a basketball game chanted “food-stamps,” “food-stamps” and how they appeared so insensitive, so out of touch, and yet, so innocent! Yes, so politically incorrect. They only knew that, yes indeed, there are two Americas! Don’t we adults contribute to such a lack of “history” when we continue to deny our country’s social problems?
I am daily amazed at how little citizens in our last two generations know about the important role the American union movement played in our country’s past. Historically, since the turn of the twentieth century, unions have fought and sacrificed for safe working conditions, a decent wage, pensions, and many more rights for workers. I have found that many people under forty also sincerely believe that the “homeless” have always been with us. The food pantry and Christmas basket is now indeed a “cherished institution” in this country. “Oh, when will we ever learn.”
The article then speculated that perhaps this food shortage was due to a “weakness in the economy” and the heating/energy crisis. As I read on I began to wonder to whom and why this news was being reported and why the reporter failed to say a word about “welfare reform” --- the federal governments retreat from the family entitlement program ---a much needed safety net for the poor children in this country.
Was the article intended to give succor or assuage the guilt of the American people for increasingly allowing the poor children of this country to go hungry and cold throughout another winter? How would this article relieve the pain and suffering of one third of our children?
It seems that now that the poor single mothers “have got their act together and have learned how to wind an alarm clock,” and now that our government has withdrawn its “handouts” that we are no longer able to blame the poor families of this country. It now seems to be in vogue to blame God and our economy. “Oh, when will we ever learn?”
Who could not feel sad and mourn for the thirteen miners who died, and the one now in a deep coma, and their families? One follow-up news article informed the reader about the upcoming investigation and speculated about the likely causes of the explosion. Here again God was called forth in the form of “lighting” and perhaps a faulty ventilation system as the most likely culprits. No mention was made of all the mining company’s safety violations or that it was a non-union company.
We were assured however that the Mine Safety and Health Administration officials were on the job and justice would be done. Not in this article, or any of the earlier articles, or on the talk shows I listened to about this incident, was it reported that this was a non-union mine. None of the miners’ families mentioned this ---probably out of fear of other family members losing their jobs. “Oh, when will we ever learn?
Finally, I read about the high school students who at a basketball game chanted “food-stamps,” “food-stamps” and how they appeared so insensitive, so out of touch, and yet, so innocent! Yes, so politically incorrect. They only knew that, yes indeed, there are two Americas! Don’t we adults contribute to such a lack of “history” when we continue to deny our country’s social problems?
I am daily amazed at how little citizens in our last two generations know about the important role the American union movement played in our country’s past. Historically, since the turn of the twentieth century, unions have fought and sacrificed for safe working conditions, a decent wage, pensions, and many more rights for workers. I have found that many people under forty also sincerely believe that the “homeless” have always been with us. The food pantry and Christmas basket is now indeed a “cherished institution” in this country. “Oh, when will we ever learn.”
An Invitation to Partner
Dear Friends,
About two years ago I retired and at about the same time I joined the Unity Church of Madison. Soon afterwards I joined Unity’s Social Justice Ministry Advisory Council. Unity established a Social Justice Ministry program about six months ago and I have been on the Council for about four months. For me this opportunity to serve has been a real privilege and I am looking forward to continuing to serve in this way.
During this same time period however while reading my newspaper I become increasingly aware of the corruption at our State Capitol and of the extent that our state legislators are now only serving those special interest groups that financially support their re-election. I learned that as an individual citizen, your interests and mine, is really of little concern to those who represent us anymore. They have only two primary concerns: serving those special interests with the most money, and getting re-elected.
While daily reading of the corruption at our Capitol I also learned of a non-partisan group called the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign (WDC). The WDC is a citizen advocacy group that has been working for campaign finance reform since 1995. To learn more about WDC or to join, visit their website or at wisdc@wisdc.org or call 608-255-4260.
Now that I am retired I have decided that I want to work and do whatever I can to help take back our Legislature (our democracy) for our grandchildren. I am wonder if you feel about this issue as I do? If so, I would like to work with you and for you on this concern. I know that you are probably not retired, and maybe not as able at this time to give as much time to this issue as me. Nevertheless you may feel that you have some time and want to do something to help. If you would like, I would like it if you could see me as working for you, at least part time, on your behalf. In exchange I would like your ideas and your participation at whatever level will work for you.
This letter is an invitation to you from me to partner with me on this important issue. If you are interested in staying in contact with me on this issue or would be interested in having me contact you in the future for your help with one or more very specific assignments, (e.g., signing a petition or a letter, making a call, etc.) then please contact me at 608-249-5672 or e-mail me at bergentown@sbc.global.net.
Sincerely yours,
Bill Benedict
About two years ago I retired and at about the same time I joined the Unity Church of Madison. Soon afterwards I joined Unity’s Social Justice Ministry Advisory Council. Unity established a Social Justice Ministry program about six months ago and I have been on the Council for about four months. For me this opportunity to serve has been a real privilege and I am looking forward to continuing to serve in this way.
During this same time period however while reading my newspaper I become increasingly aware of the corruption at our State Capitol and of the extent that our state legislators are now only serving those special interest groups that financially support their re-election. I learned that as an individual citizen, your interests and mine, is really of little concern to those who represent us anymore. They have only two primary concerns: serving those special interests with the most money, and getting re-elected.
While daily reading of the corruption at our Capitol I also learned of a non-partisan group called the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign (WDC). The WDC is a citizen advocacy group that has been working for campaign finance reform since 1995. To learn more about WDC or to join, visit their website or at wisdc@wisdc.org or call 608-255-4260.
Now that I am retired I have decided that I want to work and do whatever I can to help take back our Legislature (our democracy) for our grandchildren. I am wonder if you feel about this issue as I do? If so, I would like to work with you and for you on this concern. I know that you are probably not retired, and maybe not as able at this time to give as much time to this issue as me. Nevertheless you may feel that you have some time and want to do something to help. If you would like, I would like it if you could see me as working for you, at least part time, on your behalf. In exchange I would like your ideas and your participation at whatever level will work for you.
This letter is an invitation to you from me to partner with me on this important issue. If you are interested in staying in contact with me on this issue or would be interested in having me contact you in the future for your help with one or more very specific assignments, (e.g., signing a petition or a letter, making a call, etc.) then please contact me at 608-249-5672 or e-mail me at bergentown@sbc.global.net.
Sincerely yours,
Bill Benedict
Friday, September 21, 2007
Need for Watchdog Citizen Group For Stem-cell Research
The State of Wisconsin needs a state wide, non-profit, non-partisan, consumer and taxpayer based watchdog group to ensure affordable and accessible pharmaceuticals for Wisconsin citizens in the twenty-first century. As thousands of baby boomers are about to enter the health care delivery system one of the major components of their health care is affordable and accessible medication. Our present medication crisis, particularly for our older and low income citizens, will only grow larger in the years ahead.
It seems ironic to me that a state with such progressive and innovative traditions as Wisconsin, and which now presumes to be the preeminent leader in stem-cell research, may become a “Johnny-come-lately” player in the struggle to bring about more affordable and accessible health care to all its citizens. There is a clear need for greater transparency in the relationship between the Wisconsin’s Department of Administration (DOA), the University of Wisconsin (UW), including its affiliate the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) and its subsidiary, The WiCell Research Institute, and the private biotech commercial interests.
This intermingling and blurring of public with private biotech dollars can best be seen in Wisconsin’s $750 Institutes for Discovery initiative. Public guidelines and procedures should be put in place to allow independent transparency and accountability with regular audits to prevent even a shadow of misconduct.
Without a citizens’ watchdog group, the potential for conflicts of interest, fraud and corruption remains high. Similarly, the risk that consumers’ interests resulting from such research will be ignored also remains high. In reading about this joint public-private venture I have yet to see any substantive safeguards taken to help ensure that Wisconsin taxpayers’ investment will result in more affordable medication or therapy products for its citizens in the days ahead. If we are not careful, the eventual outcome will be what we have right now ---thousands of patients remaining in need and beholden and at the mercy of the pharmaceutical industry. This oversight body would help ensure that no blank checks will go to private companies in the false hope that their will somehow be a freewill trickling down effect to our most needy citizens.
The need for greater transparency in the rapidly growing stem-cell research industry is also important in the light of the most recent subterfuge attempted by a private stem-cell research company in California. Driven by the twin desires to be first and to get rich quick we have seen, first in Japan and now here in our own country, blatant deception and half-truths from stem-sell research companies claiming breakthroughs where none actually existed.
Some experts believe that when stem-cell scientists increasingly choose to either own or heavily invest in their own research companies, both bad science and a greater likelihood for fraud and political corruption results. While such systemic conflicts of interest exist, and episodes of pseudo science persist, the media has remained surprisingly quiet. This fact has left consumers without a voice. The principal mission of a watchdog group would be to ensure that public dollars spent to support private biotech research, including stem-cell research, are accompanied with contractual agreements and policies that will result in more affordable and accessible pharmaceutical products in the future.
This group’s goals would also include:
∑ To study and report back to the public on the size and status of the consumers’ stake in public funding of private biotech research in Wisconsin. This study should make explicit the political and economic arrangements that now exist between government, business, the media and the state’s consumers, and the role that each plays in Wisconsin’s bio-tech industry.
∑ To clarify and make more transparent the relationships that exist between the legislature, DOA, UW, WARF, WiCell Research Institute, and private enterprises, particularly those led by scientists/physician-owned or invested bio-tech research companies.
∑ To track and report the amount of both public and private dollars spent on stem-cell research and on the actions taken to protect the taxpayers’ investment in ensuring more affordable medications. To track and report on all licensing revenues and product royalties.
∑ To help assure that Wisconsin’s bio-tech industry is operating consonant with the very highest business, managerial, professional and medical research standards.
In a recent agreement with WARF and the DOA, Wisconsin waived stem-sell license fees for biotech companies that operate in Wisconsin. Out-of-state companies will continue to pay between $75,000 and $400,000 depending on the company’s size. We need to be concerned that Wisconsin dose not put the interests of private biotech investors, located in or out of Wisconsin, ahead of the best interests of taxpayers and perspective patients.
A portion of the money raised through this licensing of scientific studies and resulting discoveries should be used too make new therapies available to people who can’t afford them.
For example, in exchange for such fee waivers, was there any thought given to requiring firms operating in Wisconsin to agree that any therapy products resulting from their scientific discoveries be sold to Wisconsin’s poorest at a special in-state cost? And for those companies operating out of state, certainly a portion of these licensing revenues should be used to make any new therapies that result from such licensed research more affordable and accessible to all Wisconsin consumers.
Consumer related legislation should be considered that would require any biotech companies licensed by WARF or supported by public dollars to agree to sell products resulting from these discoveries at their lowest price. Such a statute could require that a label on such projects clearly state that this product will receive a discount if sold in Wisconsin. A more general consumer focused statute should be written which would deal with ownership policies and rules for all the scientific discoveries or licensed intellectual properties (IP) supported or subsidized by public funding in the State of Wisconsin.
It is not too early to take action now on this issue. For every month that passes where consumers remain outside the communication loop and absent at the stakeholders’ table, the more the public will remain exposed and beholden to the pharmaceutical industry and the ever increasing likelihood that our medication bills will continue to be priced beyond the reach of many older Americans.
The need for such a group is all the more necessary when we consider that when most citizens are attacked and suffering from a terminally threatening disease, when they are weakest and most vulnerable, they are often also in their greatest financial need. A consumer watchdog group will enable and allow us, while we are strong and healthy, to invest in a worthy and critically important cause. Lets not let Wisconsin citizens when they become ill.
It seems ironic to me that a state with such progressive and innovative traditions as Wisconsin, and which now presumes to be the preeminent leader in stem-cell research, may become a “Johnny-come-lately” player in the struggle to bring about more affordable and accessible health care to all its citizens. There is a clear need for greater transparency in the relationship between the Wisconsin’s Department of Administration (DOA), the University of Wisconsin (UW), including its affiliate the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) and its subsidiary, The WiCell Research Institute, and the private biotech commercial interests.
This intermingling and blurring of public with private biotech dollars can best be seen in Wisconsin’s $750 Institutes for Discovery initiative. Public guidelines and procedures should be put in place to allow independent transparency and accountability with regular audits to prevent even a shadow of misconduct.
Without a citizens’ watchdog group, the potential for conflicts of interest, fraud and corruption remains high. Similarly, the risk that consumers’ interests resulting from such research will be ignored also remains high. In reading about this joint public-private venture I have yet to see any substantive safeguards taken to help ensure that Wisconsin taxpayers’ investment will result in more affordable medication or therapy products for its citizens in the days ahead. If we are not careful, the eventual outcome will be what we have right now ---thousands of patients remaining in need and beholden and at the mercy of the pharmaceutical industry. This oversight body would help ensure that no blank checks will go to private companies in the false hope that their will somehow be a freewill trickling down effect to our most needy citizens.
The need for greater transparency in the rapidly growing stem-cell research industry is also important in the light of the most recent subterfuge attempted by a private stem-cell research company in California. Driven by the twin desires to be first and to get rich quick we have seen, first in Japan and now here in our own country, blatant deception and half-truths from stem-sell research companies claiming breakthroughs where none actually existed.
Some experts believe that when stem-cell scientists increasingly choose to either own or heavily invest in their own research companies, both bad science and a greater likelihood for fraud and political corruption results. While such systemic conflicts of interest exist, and episodes of pseudo science persist, the media has remained surprisingly quiet. This fact has left consumers without a voice. The principal mission of a watchdog group would be to ensure that public dollars spent to support private biotech research, including stem-cell research, are accompanied with contractual agreements and policies that will result in more affordable and accessible pharmaceutical products in the future.
This group’s goals would also include:
∑ To study and report back to the public on the size and status of the consumers’ stake in public funding of private biotech research in Wisconsin. This study should make explicit the political and economic arrangements that now exist between government, business, the media and the state’s consumers, and the role that each plays in Wisconsin’s bio-tech industry.
∑ To clarify and make more transparent the relationships that exist between the legislature, DOA, UW, WARF, WiCell Research Institute, and private enterprises, particularly those led by scientists/physician-owned or invested bio-tech research companies.
∑ To track and report the amount of both public and private dollars spent on stem-cell research and on the actions taken to protect the taxpayers’ investment in ensuring more affordable medications. To track and report on all licensing revenues and product royalties.
∑ To help assure that Wisconsin’s bio-tech industry is operating consonant with the very highest business, managerial, professional and medical research standards.
In a recent agreement with WARF and the DOA, Wisconsin waived stem-sell license fees for biotech companies that operate in Wisconsin. Out-of-state companies will continue to pay between $75,000 and $400,000 depending on the company’s size. We need to be concerned that Wisconsin dose not put the interests of private biotech investors, located in or out of Wisconsin, ahead of the best interests of taxpayers and perspective patients.
A portion of the money raised through this licensing of scientific studies and resulting discoveries should be used too make new therapies available to people who can’t afford them.
For example, in exchange for such fee waivers, was there any thought given to requiring firms operating in Wisconsin to agree that any therapy products resulting from their scientific discoveries be sold to Wisconsin’s poorest at a special in-state cost? And for those companies operating out of state, certainly a portion of these licensing revenues should be used to make any new therapies that result from such licensed research more affordable and accessible to all Wisconsin consumers.
Consumer related legislation should be considered that would require any biotech companies licensed by WARF or supported by public dollars to agree to sell products resulting from these discoveries at their lowest price. Such a statute could require that a label on such projects clearly state that this product will receive a discount if sold in Wisconsin. A more general consumer focused statute should be written which would deal with ownership policies and rules for all the scientific discoveries or licensed intellectual properties (IP) supported or subsidized by public funding in the State of Wisconsin.
It is not too early to take action now on this issue. For every month that passes where consumers remain outside the communication loop and absent at the stakeholders’ table, the more the public will remain exposed and beholden to the pharmaceutical industry and the ever increasing likelihood that our medication bills will continue to be priced beyond the reach of many older Americans.
The need for such a group is all the more necessary when we consider that when most citizens are attacked and suffering from a terminally threatening disease, when they are weakest and most vulnerable, they are often also in their greatest financial need. A consumer watchdog group will enable and allow us, while we are strong and healthy, to invest in a worthy and critically important cause. Lets not let Wisconsin citizens when they become ill.
Let’s Act Now for Lyndee
I read with interest and much pride about Wisconsin’s latest whistleblower – Lyndee (Wall) Woodliff. For many weeks now since the first two Caucus prosecutions I have been trying to think of a way to bring about public campaign financing reform before
the series of prosecutions end - before the people of Wisconsin forget and, business as usual, returns to our Capital.
I propose that we put a face on this fight for public campaign finance reform. Who better that our courageous whistleblower, Lyndee (Wall) Woodliff. Let the banners read, “Let’s do it for Lyndee.” Let's do what Lyndee Woodliff did. She cared enough for the people’s democracy that she gave up a secure job so that you and I could be represented fairly and justly. (See the Journal’s Monday story, “Whither the whistleblower?”) The very least you and I can do as citizens is to call your legislators now, and tell them, that you too, like Lyndee Wall, have had enough!
the series of prosecutions end - before the people of Wisconsin forget and, business as usual, returns to our Capital.
I propose that we put a face on this fight for public campaign finance reform. Who better that our courageous whistleblower, Lyndee (Wall) Woodliff. Let the banners read, “Let’s do it for Lyndee.” Let's do what Lyndee Woodliff did. She cared enough for the people’s democracy that she gave up a secure job so that you and I could be represented fairly and justly. (See the Journal’s Monday story, “Whither the whistleblower?”) The very least you and I can do as citizens is to call your legislators now, and tell them, that you too, like Lyndee Wall, have had enough!
Letter to the Editor – Journal Sentinel
In recent weeks many citizens have characterize Judge Annette Ziegler’s feelings about her ethical lapses as being smug and arrogant. While for many Wisconsin citizens who have been following this story for the past two months, such words unfortunately, while true and providing us all with some solace, still misses the most salient feature of this case.
I believe it’s much more accurate to label her seemingly persistent indifference and perception of having done northing wrong as a character deficit, or if you prefer, a most significant “blind spot.” A judge who knowingly refuses to accuse herself and rules based on her own personal style versus interpreting and obeying the state’s codified judicial ethics and the law is clearly unfit to serve on this state’s highest court.
What other conclusions can a reasonable person and the Wisconsin State Supreme Court come to when Judge Ziegler still, to this very moment, continues in the print media to persistently discount and ignore institutional norms regarding judicial propriety---including even the appearance of partiality – over and over again? Obviously, even after being informed and rebuked repeatedly, the person still continues to fail to admit the error of her ways and apologize.
This is more than a personality trait, but fundamental evidence to how she is most likely to perform as a jurist under similar circumstances in the future. It goes to the heart of a fundamental question. Judge Ziegler, what is it that you don’t understand about equity, fairness, and impartiality?
Respectfully, William R. Benedict
I believe it’s much more accurate to label her seemingly persistent indifference and perception of having done northing wrong as a character deficit, or if you prefer, a most significant “blind spot.” A judge who knowingly refuses to accuse herself and rules based on her own personal style versus interpreting and obeying the state’s codified judicial ethics and the law is clearly unfit to serve on this state’s highest court.
What other conclusions can a reasonable person and the Wisconsin State Supreme Court come to when Judge Ziegler still, to this very moment, continues in the print media to persistently discount and ignore institutional norms regarding judicial propriety---including even the appearance of partiality – over and over again? Obviously, even after being informed and rebuked repeatedly, the person still continues to fail to admit the error of her ways and apologize.
This is more than a personality trait, but fundamental evidence to how she is most likely to perform as a jurist under similar circumstances in the future. It goes to the heart of a fundamental question. Judge Ziegler, what is it that you don’t understand about equity, fairness, and impartiality?
Respectfully, William R. Benedict
Homelessness and values
Thanks so much to Mr. Norman C. Granvold’s guest column and to the Journal for printing it – “Revamp shelters and pantries.”
It was so refreshing finally to read about a meaningful, realistic, and very practical solution to the problem of homelessness in our community. Granvold proposes that we directly address the individual problems that prevent homeless people from participating fully in our community. He presents a viable framework for addressing this shameful problem rather than continuing with our present highly fragmented and piece meal approaches. His solution calls for a central evaluation and case management system which customizes the help for each homeless person making use of existing facilities and programs.
Granvold correctly identifies seven problem categories that produce homelessness. Not surprisingly to many of us, none of them have to do with laziness, indolence, lack of morals, or worthlessness. They include substance abuse, mental problems, post-traumatic stress syndrome, medical problems, job training, lack of money and low cost housing, and job training. His outcomes are the same as we all desire. The goal is to return the homeless person to society as productive and self-sufficient citizens. His proposed solutions are surprisingly simple, practical and affordable. For example, he proposes that homeless people be provided with vouchers or coupons versus cans and packages so that they can buy what they really need – nutritious food and other daily living essentials.
The writer correctly chose the best time of year to submit this kind of column He knows that many citizens associate homelessness and hunger only with the Christmas season. He knows that it’s only during this narrow window that what he has to say will receive much traction. He needs to be commended for his objectivity, for avoiding blaming his reader, and for dealing with a problem that many of us just don’t want to hear about. He avoided, however, talking about the attitudes and values which affect our lens and allows this tragic social blight to continue to grow in our otherwise caring and humane community.
Reading his column prompted me to ask, not what problems the homeless bring with them, but rather, what attitudes and values do many Americans have that make this social issue so intractable and controversial?
Fortunately Talcott Parsons, (1902-1979) a prominent American sociologist, was able to identify five dichotomous and alternative value-oriented questions which I believe can shed some light on this insidious social problem.
Most briefly these include: 1.) Affectivity versus Affectivity Neutrality, 2.) Particularism versus Universalism, 3.) Self-interest versus Collectivity, 4.) Specificity versus Diffuseness, and 5.) Ascribed versus Achieved. Again, most generally, and only for our purposes here, the first four choices have to do with deciding to perceive and act on strictly a personal or special group basis versus based on broader universal value considerations. On each of these five variables all of us lie somewhere on a continuum.
The last or fifth value choice, “ascribed versus achieved,” is perhaps the most relevant choice that we as citizens should ponder in regard to our attitudes and values as they have to do with homelessness and poverty in general. This question has to do whether we are going to respond to the homeless person in terms of specific given personal attributes, i.e., human being, father, mother, child, age, sex or based on his or her achievements or performance alone? With regard to the most basic human needs such as food, clothing, housing, and health care, whether the person “earns it” or is “successful” or “better than” should not separate him or her from our community. On this issue the values of interdependence, integration, and inclusiveness should be paramount.
In the context of deciding upon basic human needs there should be no place for separating us into “us” and “them” or “winners” or “losers.” Obviously, in many other contexts in our very competitive national culture such as at work, school, and in sports, the primacy of an achievement-performance value orientation has clearly proven to be very appropriate and effective.
In summary, with regard to the homeless issue, we're not talking about employees, students or athletes, we are talking about, all of us – human beings.
It was so refreshing finally to read about a meaningful, realistic, and very practical solution to the problem of homelessness in our community. Granvold proposes that we directly address the individual problems that prevent homeless people from participating fully in our community. He presents a viable framework for addressing this shameful problem rather than continuing with our present highly fragmented and piece meal approaches. His solution calls for a central evaluation and case management system which customizes the help for each homeless person making use of existing facilities and programs.
Granvold correctly identifies seven problem categories that produce homelessness. Not surprisingly to many of us, none of them have to do with laziness, indolence, lack of morals, or worthlessness. They include substance abuse, mental problems, post-traumatic stress syndrome, medical problems, job training, lack of money and low cost housing, and job training. His outcomes are the same as we all desire. The goal is to return the homeless person to society as productive and self-sufficient citizens. His proposed solutions are surprisingly simple, practical and affordable. For example, he proposes that homeless people be provided with vouchers or coupons versus cans and packages so that they can buy what they really need – nutritious food and other daily living essentials.
The writer correctly chose the best time of year to submit this kind of column He knows that many citizens associate homelessness and hunger only with the Christmas season. He knows that it’s only during this narrow window that what he has to say will receive much traction. He needs to be commended for his objectivity, for avoiding blaming his reader, and for dealing with a problem that many of us just don’t want to hear about. He avoided, however, talking about the attitudes and values which affect our lens and allows this tragic social blight to continue to grow in our otherwise caring and humane community.
Reading his column prompted me to ask, not what problems the homeless bring with them, but rather, what attitudes and values do many Americans have that make this social issue so intractable and controversial?
Fortunately Talcott Parsons, (1902-1979) a prominent American sociologist, was able to identify five dichotomous and alternative value-oriented questions which I believe can shed some light on this insidious social problem.
Most briefly these include: 1.) Affectivity versus Affectivity Neutrality, 2.) Particularism versus Universalism, 3.) Self-interest versus Collectivity, 4.) Specificity versus Diffuseness, and 5.) Ascribed versus Achieved. Again, most generally, and only for our purposes here, the first four choices have to do with deciding to perceive and act on strictly a personal or special group basis versus based on broader universal value considerations. On each of these five variables all of us lie somewhere on a continuum.
The last or fifth value choice, “ascribed versus achieved,” is perhaps the most relevant choice that we as citizens should ponder in regard to our attitudes and values as they have to do with homelessness and poverty in general. This question has to do whether we are going to respond to the homeless person in terms of specific given personal attributes, i.e., human being, father, mother, child, age, sex or based on his or her achievements or performance alone? With regard to the most basic human needs such as food, clothing, housing, and health care, whether the person “earns it” or is “successful” or “better than” should not separate him or her from our community. On this issue the values of interdependence, integration, and inclusiveness should be paramount.
In the context of deciding upon basic human needs there should be no place for separating us into “us” and “them” or “winners” or “losers.” Obviously, in many other contexts in our very competitive national culture such as at work, school, and in sports, the primacy of an achievement-performance value orientation has clearly proven to be very appropriate and effective.
In summary, with regard to the homeless issue, we're not talking about employees, students or athletes, we are talking about, all of us – human beings.
WARF takes step toward the democracy of science
The recent action by the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) to further clarify its licensing and fee practices for non-commercial stem cell research entities is a big step forward in the support of non-profits, the democracy of science, and the tax payers of Wisconsin. WARF should be commended for taking this action.
It also was a wise and timely public relations move which will go a long way toward mollifying out-of-state stem cell critics who have charged WARF with unduly impeding America’s progress in stem cell research and development. This more enlightened policy more accurately portrays how the public sector and its institutions should work hand in hand with the not-for-profit community to help ensure that the intended benefits of such science will serve all the citizens of Wisconsin.
Without this more recent policy, WARF itself has laid itself open to the charge by non-profit watchdog groups of impeding vital, publicly funded stem cell research, and paradoxically, supporting the “commercialization” of public financed stem cell research. Wisconsin taxpayers want to know that their money for stem cell research will result
in ever more affordable and accessible medical outcomes. They no longer choose to pay twice, first to publicly subsidize private research and development, and again when the derived cures reach their local pharmacy.
WARF’s decision to drop their disguised threat to require the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine to buy a license from WARF and require CIRM to share their royalties, has done much to diffuse the ever growing acrimony between them. In spite of WARF’s claim to the contrary, its decision to adopt a more conciliatory posture with CIRM and the larger stem cell community, will likely significantly soften or prevent any potential litigation that might otherwise accompany the federal patent office’s upcoming review of WARF’s stem cell patents.
The public, and more specifically, the seventy-six million baby boomers in this country, those born between 1946 and 1964, are helping redefine every aspect of our culture, from the media to health care. There critical attitude and motivation to expect more from their health research dollar is driven by their own desire for life extension and human enhancement. This group envisions that stem cell research will eventually extend their power, influence, and themselves deep into the twenty-first century.
Law makes and our public officials who fail to recognize what has been called the “most affluent demographic group on the planet’ will do so at their own peril. Increasingly this new health care culture emphasizing “longevity medicine” will lead not just to longer lives, but to longer, more productive workers. In a future at risk of depopulation due to lower birth rates, longevity medicine will likely become a much needed social entitlement. Our lawmakers who, as I write this article, are formulating a new and more comprehensive health care program for us all, would do well to include in their health care policy making, the role that the taxpayers’stem cell dollars should play in making this care more affordable and accessible to all our citizens.
It also was a wise and timely public relations move which will go a long way toward mollifying out-of-state stem cell critics who have charged WARF with unduly impeding America’s progress in stem cell research and development. This more enlightened policy more accurately portrays how the public sector and its institutions should work hand in hand with the not-for-profit community to help ensure that the intended benefits of such science will serve all the citizens of Wisconsin.
Without this more recent policy, WARF itself has laid itself open to the charge by non-profit watchdog groups of impeding vital, publicly funded stem cell research, and paradoxically, supporting the “commercialization” of public financed stem cell research. Wisconsin taxpayers want to know that their money for stem cell research will result
in ever more affordable and accessible medical outcomes. They no longer choose to pay twice, first to publicly subsidize private research and development, and again when the derived cures reach their local pharmacy.
WARF’s decision to drop their disguised threat to require the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine to buy a license from WARF and require CIRM to share their royalties, has done much to diffuse the ever growing acrimony between them. In spite of WARF’s claim to the contrary, its decision to adopt a more conciliatory posture with CIRM and the larger stem cell community, will likely significantly soften or prevent any potential litigation that might otherwise accompany the federal patent office’s upcoming review of WARF’s stem cell patents.
The public, and more specifically, the seventy-six million baby boomers in this country, those born between 1946 and 1964, are helping redefine every aspect of our culture, from the media to health care. There critical attitude and motivation to expect more from their health research dollar is driven by their own desire for life extension and human enhancement. This group envisions that stem cell research will eventually extend their power, influence, and themselves deep into the twenty-first century.
Law makes and our public officials who fail to recognize what has been called the “most affluent demographic group on the planet’ will do so at their own peril. Increasingly this new health care culture emphasizing “longevity medicine” will lead not just to longer lives, but to longer, more productive workers. In a future at risk of depopulation due to lower birth rates, longevity medicine will likely become a much needed social entitlement. Our lawmakers who, as I write this article, are formulating a new and more comprehensive health care program for us all, would do well to include in their health care policy making, the role that the taxpayers’stem cell dollars should play in making this care more affordable and accessible to all our citizens.
Let’s Act Now for Lyndee
If profit, financial gain, is the true bottom line or key result area (KRA) for every successful business or corporation, would it not be correct to assume that most commercial newspapers, including this newspaper, will ultimately write the story, print the add, or ask the question to serve that end? Isn’t it the truth that the newspaper’s number one customers are really their shareholders? Of course this is true of our radio and television companies as well.
This fact makes even more courageous what the Wisconsin State Journal did back in 2001. The Journal was the first to publish the Caucus allegations which ultimately sparked criminal charges against several lawmakers in our State legislature.
I believe that most Wisconsin citizens believe that the profit motive should stop at the entrance to our State Capital. The bottom line or KRA for our legislators should be solidly, and always, based only on the public good - what is in the best interests of the people of Wisconsin? Certainly the Journal’s editors know this. If you too really believe that this is the way it should be, then please call your state legislators today and tell them that you want them to pass public campaign financing now.
We need to do this before the series of caucus prosecutions end, and before things at our Capital return to what was before. I propose that we put a face on this fight for public campaign finance reform. Who better that our courageous whistleblower, Lyndee (Wall) Woodliff. Let the banners read, “Let’s do it for Lyndee.” Let's do what Lyndee Woodliff did. She cared enough for the people’s democracy that she gave up a secure job so that you and I could be represented fairly and justly. (See the Journal’s Monday story, “Whither the whistleblower?”) Call your legislators now, and tell them, that you too, like Lyndee Wall, have had enough!
This fact makes even more courageous what the Wisconsin State Journal did back in 2001. The Journal was the first to publish the Caucus allegations which ultimately sparked criminal charges against several lawmakers in our State legislature.
I believe that most Wisconsin citizens believe that the profit motive should stop at the entrance to our State Capital. The bottom line or KRA for our legislators should be solidly, and always, based only on the public good - what is in the best interests of the people of Wisconsin? Certainly the Journal’s editors know this. If you too really believe that this is the way it should be, then please call your state legislators today and tell them that you want them to pass public campaign financing now.
We need to do this before the series of caucus prosecutions end, and before things at our Capital return to what was before. I propose that we put a face on this fight for public campaign finance reform. Who better that our courageous whistleblower, Lyndee (Wall) Woodliff. Let the banners read, “Let’s do it for Lyndee.” Let's do what Lyndee Woodliff did. She cared enough for the people’s democracy that she gave up a secure job so that you and I could be represented fairly and justly. (See the Journal’s Monday story, “Whither the whistleblower?”) Call your legislators now, and tell them, that you too, like Lyndee Wall, have had enough!
Subtle Lobbyist
Letter to the Editor:
Journalist, Phil Brinkman, used the words “subtle game” and “sophisticated” to described the Wisconsin lobbying process in his special Sunday feature: (see: “Political donations aren’t keys to the kingdom”).
What is so subtle or sophisticated about the lobbyist, who Brinkman describes, as the key middle person and link between the donating company and the top administrative official or legislator receiving it? Especially, when we read that in many instances the lobbyist is a former administrative official, legislator, campaign staffer, or company employee.
Is it subtle or sophisticated when we learn that there is no law in Wisconsin requiring lobbyists to report political consulting work on behalf of companies that do business with the state?
What is subtle or sophisticated about a campaign fund raising event that largely includes only trade associations, lobbyists, and potential key $1,000 dollar donors? Were there any ordinary taxpaying citizens there?
What is subtle or sophisticated about the same corporation, receiving 47 state contracts, and the same company officials, within only a few days after attending a gubernatorial campaign fund raising event, contributing several thousands of dollars? Especially, when these same contributing company officials resided in three non-Wisconsin states? When just weeks before, these same 47 contracts are consolidated under a no-bid arrangement into one larger single state contract.
What is subtle or sophisticated about when such “paying to play” companies are confronted and called on for comments regarding their “donations” they simply report that they are “not available.”
Rather than subtle and sophisticated, this writer and tax payer, can and will clearly call, this process what it really is. Mr. Brinkman has brilliantly described a lobbying process that is flagrantly and totally dishonest and corrupt to the core. If this article doesn’t result in state laws to put caps on political campaigns or the passing of a comprehensive public finance campaign law like in Arizona, I don’t know what will!
Journalist, Phil Brinkman, used the words “subtle game” and “sophisticated” to described the Wisconsin lobbying process in his special Sunday feature: (see: “Political donations aren’t keys to the kingdom”).
What is so subtle or sophisticated about the lobbyist, who Brinkman describes, as the key middle person and link between the donating company and the top administrative official or legislator receiving it? Especially, when we read that in many instances the lobbyist is a former administrative official, legislator, campaign staffer, or company employee.
Is it subtle or sophisticated when we learn that there is no law in Wisconsin requiring lobbyists to report political consulting work on behalf of companies that do business with the state?
What is subtle or sophisticated about a campaign fund raising event that largely includes only trade associations, lobbyists, and potential key $1,000 dollar donors? Were there any ordinary taxpaying citizens there?
What is subtle or sophisticated about the same corporation, receiving 47 state contracts, and the same company officials, within only a few days after attending a gubernatorial campaign fund raising event, contributing several thousands of dollars? Especially, when these same contributing company officials resided in three non-Wisconsin states? When just weeks before, these same 47 contracts are consolidated under a no-bid arrangement into one larger single state contract.
What is subtle or sophisticated about when such “paying to play” companies are confronted and called on for comments regarding their “donations” they simply report that they are “not available.”
Rather than subtle and sophisticated, this writer and tax payer, can and will clearly call, this process what it really is. Mr. Brinkman has brilliantly described a lobbying process that is flagrantly and totally dishonest and corrupt to the core. If this article doesn’t result in state laws to put caps on political campaigns or the passing of a comprehensive public finance campaign law like in Arizona, I don’t know what will!
State of Our Lakes
Fewer Madison residents swim in the lakes now as compared to ten years ago. The Journal’s recent series of articles concerning the safety of Madison’s drinking water has raised serious questions regarding the quality of our drinking water. We read almost weekly of special interests encroaching on public access to our lake shores by increasing property acquisitions and to expanding existing docks and wharves.
It’s normal at about this time of the year to read in our Madison newspaper that certain public swimming areas must be closed owing to pollution or worse. We read that our mayor is considering sacrificing more of the people’s lake shore access in order to meet city expenses. Our City Council continues to allow private property owners to spray poisons and lethal toxins on their lawns. These “fertilizers” then continue to run into and poison and pollute our lakes. As a result the dark green stringy weeds grow ever thicker and deeper and encroaches ever further out into the center of our lakes. The truth is that Madison Lakes are indeed in trouble as public access shrinks and the over all quality and purity of our lake water and aquifers continue to be under assault by private interests and poor private land and water stewards.
I enthusiastically agree with Bill Parker of the Madison Parks Commission, which he leads, when he recently stated, “Thus, we should not limit our options relating to land we own publicly or waver from our vision of greater access to city lakeshores, and adding open space in an increasingly dense urban area.”
During my first year in Dane County, I was struck by two main impressions of the City of Madison. First, how richly blessed Madison was to lie in the midst of so many miles of beautiful shore land. Secondly, how sad and unjust, it seemed, that the average Madison resident had public access to so little of it.
I strongly recommend that the City of Madison and Dane County adopt much more stringent land and water stewardship ordinances that will stop deleterious building, gardening and lawn management practices that pollute our lakes and aquifers and continue to threaten the health and safety of our drinking water for generations to come. Meanwhile I choose to envision that during the next fifty years, Madison will increase its public lakeshore access in the form of more parks, swimming areas, green space areas, and walking and biking trails.
My dream and vision for Madison is that when the citizens (including your grandchildren and mine) of Madison celebrates its bi-centennial in 2056 they can proudly boast that, through their representatives, they finally asserted and reclaimed their natural right to greater public stewardship of Madison’s water resources, and significantly broadened their conservation and preservation responsibilities. I know with out any doubt that if there was a referendum to this effect today, the people of Madison would overwhelmingly support it. In keeping with its central mission, I would like to see the Madison Parks Commission initiate such a referendum.
One way to help ensure that the citizens of Madison do begin to take back part of their lakeshore would be to measure and announce the present overall quality of the drinking water and the public’s existing shoreline access now, and then publicly announce a goal to significantly improve both during the next half century.
Martin Luther King, when talking about the need to change our values, said, “I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation (I would add here, ‘and as a city’) must rapidly begin the shift from a “thing-oriented” society to a “person-oriented” society. He then went on to say that when profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.”
Let us support “the people’s revolution” and say no to the further contamination of the health and safety of our drinking water, and the diminishment of the people’s access to this beautiful and enticing lake shore. For our grandchildren, let us begin, as a city, to say no to the further privatization and degradation of our local water space and resources before it’s too late.
If we succeed, then we can triumphantly acclaim “our Madison as radiant city on the lakes,” and mean it!
It’s normal at about this time of the year to read in our Madison newspaper that certain public swimming areas must be closed owing to pollution or worse. We read that our mayor is considering sacrificing more of the people’s lake shore access in order to meet city expenses. Our City Council continues to allow private property owners to spray poisons and lethal toxins on their lawns. These “fertilizers” then continue to run into and poison and pollute our lakes. As a result the dark green stringy weeds grow ever thicker and deeper and encroaches ever further out into the center of our lakes. The truth is that Madison Lakes are indeed in trouble as public access shrinks and the over all quality and purity of our lake water and aquifers continue to be under assault by private interests and poor private land and water stewards.
I enthusiastically agree with Bill Parker of the Madison Parks Commission, which he leads, when he recently stated, “Thus, we should not limit our options relating to land we own publicly or waver from our vision of greater access to city lakeshores, and adding open space in an increasingly dense urban area.”
During my first year in Dane County, I was struck by two main impressions of the City of Madison. First, how richly blessed Madison was to lie in the midst of so many miles of beautiful shore land. Secondly, how sad and unjust, it seemed, that the average Madison resident had public access to so little of it.
I strongly recommend that the City of Madison and Dane County adopt much more stringent land and water stewardship ordinances that will stop deleterious building, gardening and lawn management practices that pollute our lakes and aquifers and continue to threaten the health and safety of our drinking water for generations to come. Meanwhile I choose to envision that during the next fifty years, Madison will increase its public lakeshore access in the form of more parks, swimming areas, green space areas, and walking and biking trails.
My dream and vision for Madison is that when the citizens (including your grandchildren and mine) of Madison celebrates its bi-centennial in 2056 they can proudly boast that, through their representatives, they finally asserted and reclaimed their natural right to greater public stewardship of Madison’s water resources, and significantly broadened their conservation and preservation responsibilities. I know with out any doubt that if there was a referendum to this effect today, the people of Madison would overwhelmingly support it. In keeping with its central mission, I would like to see the Madison Parks Commission initiate such a referendum.
One way to help ensure that the citizens of Madison do begin to take back part of their lakeshore would be to measure and announce the present overall quality of the drinking water and the public’s existing shoreline access now, and then publicly announce a goal to significantly improve both during the next half century.
Martin Luther King, when talking about the need to change our values, said, “I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation (I would add here, ‘and as a city’) must rapidly begin the shift from a “thing-oriented” society to a “person-oriented” society. He then went on to say that when profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.”
Let us support “the people’s revolution” and say no to the further contamination of the health and safety of our drinking water, and the diminishment of the people’s access to this beautiful and enticing lake shore. For our grandchildren, let us begin, as a city, to say no to the further privatization and degradation of our local water space and resources before it’s too late.
If we succeed, then we can triumphantly acclaim “our Madison as radiant city on the lakes,” and mean it!
Special Interests and Our Democracy
This past weekend we watched the documentary video, The Corporation described by the New York Times as “a smart and fascinating” movie. We found it not only entertaining but also very provocative regarding the history and inner workings of this modern global conglomerate. It took me back to my own American history lessons of the late nineteenth century robber barons, and the Gestapo-like tactics that corporations later used to try and stamp out labor unions in the early twentieth century. This video tells how the corporation was later given “personhood” by the courts under the Fourteenth Amendment, including full civil rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
This morning on public radio I listened to a talk show about another film entitled We’re Holding Our Own. This was about the November 10, 1975 sinking of the Edmund Fitzgerald and the loss of a crew of 29 seamen. In the discussion which followed I was reminded again of just how cold and non-compassionate the “soul” of a corporation can be. When a caller called in to ask about to what extent the families of the dead crewman were later compensated by the company, we were told by the guest historian that the survivors reported that they received some fruit and a small plaque or souvenir.
Corporations now dominate and deform our own reality under the guise of “special interests.”. As citizens, we experience these “artificial” humans directly and daily no matter what policy issue or personal concern we have. They are all powerful and all pervasive. But most alarming to me is that they now completely control my state legislature and yours. They have bought our legislature out hook, line and sinker. They own it! These corporate giants or special interests spend their money during legislative budget hearings and at election time. Their personal representatives, the lobbyists, have your legislator’s ear, not yours! These phantom, grasping entities have high-jacked our democracy.
Postscript. We can be thankful at least that the Edmund Fitzgerald survivors reportedly did receive their social security checks. God bless them!
This morning on public radio I listened to a talk show about another film entitled We’re Holding Our Own. This was about the November 10, 1975 sinking of the Edmund Fitzgerald and the loss of a crew of 29 seamen. In the discussion which followed I was reminded again of just how cold and non-compassionate the “soul” of a corporation can be. When a caller called in to ask about to what extent the families of the dead crewman were later compensated by the company, we were told by the guest historian that the survivors reported that they received some fruit and a small plaque or souvenir.
Corporations now dominate and deform our own reality under the guise of “special interests.”. As citizens, we experience these “artificial” humans directly and daily no matter what policy issue or personal concern we have. They are all powerful and all pervasive. But most alarming to me is that they now completely control my state legislature and yours. They have bought our legislature out hook, line and sinker. They own it! These corporate giants or special interests spend their money during legislative budget hearings and at election time. Their personal representatives, the lobbyists, have your legislator’s ear, not yours! These phantom, grasping entities have high-jacked our democracy.
Postscript. We can be thankful at least that the Edmund Fitzgerald survivors reportedly did receive their social security checks. God bless them!
School Consolidation
The rancorous debate over the recent school consolidation issue is over. The larger fight for adequate school funding is just beginning. This mild insurrection is a perfect example of displaced energy and frustration. After decades now of agonizing struggles, much freely given self and community sacrifice to build and maintain a quality education program for all Madison children, Madison taxpayers’ patience and funding alternatives are running thin.
Middle class Near East Side residents were pitted against middle class West Side residents; social liberals against more conservative liberals; old school board members against newer board members; and special education against special arts programming. This in-fighting unfortunately involved group name calling such as the “complainers” versus the “truly committed” and the “spineless.”
For several weeks, vigorous advocacy and dissent ---the core ingredients for a vibrant democracy --- reigned over Madison. This grass roots democracy included numerous letters and articles written; new funding and program proposals; innovative plans were drawn up to fill up empty spaces; protesters including young people, protested and filled the meeting halls, and many win-win solutions were advanced.
Paradoxically, while all this infighting was playing out at the municipal level, our State pork barrel dependent politicians and rich special interest groups were conspiring at our capitol. . They continue to work hand-in-hand to thwart and hamstring local grass roots efforts to bring about needed local public school, health care, and tax reform for all Wisconsinites.
Until the day comes again when our state representatives begin to represent all the people’s interest in place of the special interests and big business; when campaign finance reform allows you and me to run for public office; until then, we can expect more spending caps, decreasing local municipal and school autonomy, and higher taxes.
What can we do? Join the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign (wisdc@wisdc.org) today. Tell your legislator to fight for the removal of local spending caps; ask him or her to speak to your group and ask your lawmaker to talk to you about his or here ten largest contributors and what he had to do to earn their support.
Tell them that unless they vote for campaign reform and cuts their dependence upon the rich and the powerful you plan to work for their defeat come the next election. Urge your local work or professional group, your church’s social justice council; your neighborhood council and local city and county representatives to help work for state campaign finance reform. Finally, ask your local school board representatives to ban together with other city and county school boards to work for campaign finance reform.
Respectfully submitted,
William R. Benedict
Middle class Near East Side residents were pitted against middle class West Side residents; social liberals against more conservative liberals; old school board members against newer board members; and special education against special arts programming. This in-fighting unfortunately involved group name calling such as the “complainers” versus the “truly committed” and the “spineless.”
For several weeks, vigorous advocacy and dissent ---the core ingredients for a vibrant democracy --- reigned over Madison. This grass roots democracy included numerous letters and articles written; new funding and program proposals; innovative plans were drawn up to fill up empty spaces; protesters including young people, protested and filled the meeting halls, and many win-win solutions were advanced.
Paradoxically, while all this infighting was playing out at the municipal level, our State pork barrel dependent politicians and rich special interest groups were conspiring at our capitol. . They continue to work hand-in-hand to thwart and hamstring local grass roots efforts to bring about needed local public school, health care, and tax reform for all Wisconsinites.
Until the day comes again when our state representatives begin to represent all the people’s interest in place of the special interests and big business; when campaign finance reform allows you and me to run for public office; until then, we can expect more spending caps, decreasing local municipal and school autonomy, and higher taxes.
What can we do? Join the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign (wisdc@wisdc.org) today. Tell your legislator to fight for the removal of local spending caps; ask him or her to speak to your group and ask your lawmaker to talk to you about his or here ten largest contributors and what he had to do to earn their support.
Tell them that unless they vote for campaign reform and cuts their dependence upon the rich and the powerful you plan to work for their defeat come the next election. Urge your local work or professional group, your church’s social justice council; your neighborhood council and local city and county representatives to help work for state campaign finance reform. Finally, ask your local school board representatives to ban together with other city and county school boards to work for campaign finance reform.
Respectfully submitted,
William R. Benedict
America’s Top Five Corporations
According to our U.S. Supreme Court the corporation politically speaking is to be treated the same as a US citizen or person. And, that money spent on political campaigns is a form of freedom of speech. I know, deep down, and so do you, that both of these decisions are neither right nor just in a true democracy. But both decisions are the law of the land and until changed, we must continue to live with this reality. Together however they have resulted in a situation which allows giant corporations to buy what they want from the peoples’ legislatures.
National and state efforts to equalize the playing field between the corporation and the individual citizen are obviously, not working. Nevertheless given this reality how can we begin to humanize and gain some measure of control of this artificial human? When are we, the American people, going to wake and begin to tame this grasping and non-feeling “paper” tiger? When are we going to rise up and together say, “We are just not going to take this anymore?” In spite of Senators McCain and Feingold, God bless them, for the foreseeable future corporations will continue, big time, to buy and control the media and our representatives. Until public finance campaign reform efforts eventually succeed, what action can we take to mollify this monster? I propose that we become much smarter and vigilant.
Given the existing playing field, I propose that we begin to more accurately judge the giant corporation based on its actual monetary deeds and not its corpulent public relations or advertising budget that continues to dumb us down and make us feel alienated and powerless as citizens. First lets get a law passed that makes every giant U.S. corporation which is owned and operated by US citizens begin to pay its fair share regardless of where it is incorporated. And while we are waiting to make this the law of the land, and to help the corporation to begin to earn our respect and trust once again, lets begin to track its “community giving” with some hard quantifiable numbers. Let a corporation’s “social capital” be judged against the following two ratios. The amount contributed to the community divided by its net profit. The amount invested in the community divided by the amount awarded its top management or CEOs.
What ever ratios are selected, like the NY stock exchange, lets choose the most accountable indexes (percent of giving based on total worth) we can find and have the top five hundred corporations routinely report their “community goodwill or performance” results. Let us, we the people, through our representative, based upon the five highest rankings, yearly pass a congressional resolution honoring the top five as the American peoples “Top Five Corporations.” If you are reading this and believe you have a better idea, then, for heaven sake let’s hear it. I am morally outraged with the status quo. If you feel like I do, please let the editor of this newspaper hear from you.
National and state efforts to equalize the playing field between the corporation and the individual citizen are obviously, not working. Nevertheless given this reality how can we begin to humanize and gain some measure of control of this artificial human? When are we, the American people, going to wake and begin to tame this grasping and non-feeling “paper” tiger? When are we going to rise up and together say, “We are just not going to take this anymore?” In spite of Senators McCain and Feingold, God bless them, for the foreseeable future corporations will continue, big time, to buy and control the media and our representatives. Until public finance campaign reform efforts eventually succeed, what action can we take to mollify this monster? I propose that we become much smarter and vigilant.
Given the existing playing field, I propose that we begin to more accurately judge the giant corporation based on its actual monetary deeds and not its corpulent public relations or advertising budget that continues to dumb us down and make us feel alienated and powerless as citizens. First lets get a law passed that makes every giant U.S. corporation which is owned and operated by US citizens begin to pay its fair share regardless of where it is incorporated. And while we are waiting to make this the law of the land, and to help the corporation to begin to earn our respect and trust once again, lets begin to track its “community giving” with some hard quantifiable numbers. Let a corporation’s “social capital” be judged against the following two ratios. The amount contributed to the community divided by its net profit. The amount invested in the community divided by the amount awarded its top management or CEOs.
What ever ratios are selected, like the NY stock exchange, lets choose the most accountable indexes (percent of giving based on total worth) we can find and have the top five hundred corporations routinely report their “community goodwill or performance” results. Let us, we the people, through our representative, based upon the five highest rankings, yearly pass a congressional resolution honoring the top five as the American peoples “Top Five Corporations.” If you are reading this and believe you have a better idea, then, for heaven sake let’s hear it. I am morally outraged with the status quo. If you feel like I do, please let the editor of this newspaper hear from you.
Pigeons
To the Editor of the Clinton Tribune Gazette
I am a seventy-one year old retiree who has raised and cared for homing pigeons myself. ---in a town of about 3000 residents and very much like Clintonville, I discovered this when I read about your very fine town on your friendly web site. This morning I read in my newspaper about one hundred fair feathered friends living in Clintonville, WI. I read that they are about to be evicted from their home of twenty-seven years.
I was especially saddened when I read the comments of Clintonville’s city administrator, Lisa Kotter, who when asked about the recent court order to evict these birds said, and I quote, “Cities do have the right to regulate licensing and zoning,” and then, seemingly in a rather arrogant and insensitive cavalier-like fashion, she added, “Sometimes we change the rules.” My aim in this letter is not intended to intrude into your fine community’s business. Certainly your city has the right and the obligation to regulate those municipal areas deemed necessary by your city council. Based only on my newspaper’s story, however, I do want to propose that the Council consider granting Mr. Kruger, the owner of the these birds, who by the way, currently holds permits to keep his flock of racing homers in his backyard, be allowed to continue to do so via the “grandfathered-in clause.”
Otherwise I feel that there our many citizens of planet earth, like myself, who will see this proposed ban as being executed in an unnecessarily arbitrary and harsh fashion. After all the homing pigeon is a “domesticated Rock Pigeon of the “Columba livia” class that has been selectively bred to be able to find its way home over extremely long distances. This fact by the way is what makes their potential capricious separation or exclusion from your community of much greater concern than otherwise. This particular community of homing pigeons for 27 years have had no other home, and it is very likely that if they are abruptly vacated from their home, this instability in their lives will continue for many generations to come, if not for ever.
Before reading your administrators dispassionate comments I was quite impressed with just how socially and civically responsible these now about to be evicted winged neighbors have been in Clintonville. I learned that they had served their community in ways that only a pigeon can ---by flying back to their home lofts from funerals, weddings, parades and even from Memorial Day services in Sheboygan, WI.
What seems regrettable is that rather than seeing these little winged friends as a special case and as special neighbors, now almost a community tradition, and continuing to welcome them into your community, they undoubtedly are being perceived now as a mistake, a nuisance, a problem, or just a pain in the neck. Perhaps it’s still not too late to save these loyal winged friends. Perhaps the Clintonville Chamber of Commerce or local American Legion post could market their “lofty home” here as a unique and wonderful story. A time when the people of Clintonville honored their special winged friends as a bastion of patriots whose earlier generations served our country loyally and valiantly in both of our World Wars, and now continue to serve its veterans each Memorial Day.
With regard to the immediate neighbors, who are probably most concerned and fearful about depreciating property values or the avian flu scare, need also to give this a second look. After all, if their property has not suffered significantly after some twenty-seven years, it’s not likely that much will change over just a few more years, by which time their owner can easily find them a new home. Also they can treasure this story of the neighborhood “birdman” and share it with their grandchildren for many future generations to come. Long after all of us are gone!
The immediate neighbors should also know that racing homing pigeons, particularly when cared for over a long period by the same owner, are some of the healthiest birds alive. This, of course, is already clearly seen by the fact that Clintonville’s Health Inspector has reportedly testified that over the years he has inspected Mr. Kruger’s property as many as ten times without finding any problems requiring him to issue a citation.
I am concerned here that whenever any segment of planet earth’s family is separated from us we all suffer a loss of Spirit, and meaning in our lives. We need to replace this attitude of fear with one of hope and generosity. I am looking forward to following this story.
I am a seventy-one year old retiree who has raised and cared for homing pigeons myself. ---in a town of about 3000 residents and very much like Clintonville, I discovered this when I read about your very fine town on your friendly web site. This morning I read in my newspaper about one hundred fair feathered friends living in Clintonville, WI. I read that they are about to be evicted from their home of twenty-seven years.
I was especially saddened when I read the comments of Clintonville’s city administrator, Lisa Kotter, who when asked about the recent court order to evict these birds said, and I quote, “Cities do have the right to regulate licensing and zoning,” and then, seemingly in a rather arrogant and insensitive cavalier-like fashion, she added, “Sometimes we change the rules.” My aim in this letter is not intended to intrude into your fine community’s business. Certainly your city has the right and the obligation to regulate those municipal areas deemed necessary by your city council. Based only on my newspaper’s story, however, I do want to propose that the Council consider granting Mr. Kruger, the owner of the these birds, who by the way, currently holds permits to keep his flock of racing homers in his backyard, be allowed to continue to do so via the “grandfathered-in clause.”
Otherwise I feel that there our many citizens of planet earth, like myself, who will see this proposed ban as being executed in an unnecessarily arbitrary and harsh fashion. After all the homing pigeon is a “domesticated Rock Pigeon of the “Columba livia” class that has been selectively bred to be able to find its way home over extremely long distances. This fact by the way is what makes their potential capricious separation or exclusion from your community of much greater concern than otherwise. This particular community of homing pigeons for 27 years have had no other home, and it is very likely that if they are abruptly vacated from their home, this instability in their lives will continue for many generations to come, if not for ever.
Before reading your administrators dispassionate comments I was quite impressed with just how socially and civically responsible these now about to be evicted winged neighbors have been in Clintonville. I learned that they had served their community in ways that only a pigeon can ---by flying back to their home lofts from funerals, weddings, parades and even from Memorial Day services in Sheboygan, WI.
What seems regrettable is that rather than seeing these little winged friends as a special case and as special neighbors, now almost a community tradition, and continuing to welcome them into your community, they undoubtedly are being perceived now as a mistake, a nuisance, a problem, or just a pain in the neck. Perhaps it’s still not too late to save these loyal winged friends. Perhaps the Clintonville Chamber of Commerce or local American Legion post could market their “lofty home” here as a unique and wonderful story. A time when the people of Clintonville honored their special winged friends as a bastion of patriots whose earlier generations served our country loyally and valiantly in both of our World Wars, and now continue to serve its veterans each Memorial Day.
With regard to the immediate neighbors, who are probably most concerned and fearful about depreciating property values or the avian flu scare, need also to give this a second look. After all, if their property has not suffered significantly after some twenty-seven years, it’s not likely that much will change over just a few more years, by which time their owner can easily find them a new home. Also they can treasure this story of the neighborhood “birdman” and share it with their grandchildren for many future generations to come. Long after all of us are gone!
The immediate neighbors should also know that racing homing pigeons, particularly when cared for over a long period by the same owner, are some of the healthiest birds alive. This, of course, is already clearly seen by the fact that Clintonville’s Health Inspector has reportedly testified that over the years he has inspected Mr. Kruger’s property as many as ten times without finding any problems requiring him to issue a citation.
I am concerned here that whenever any segment of planet earth’s family is separated from us we all suffer a loss of Spirit, and meaning in our lives. We need to replace this attitude of fear with one of hope and generosity. I am looking forward to following this story.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)