No more “war” (emphasis on the quotation marks)

Posted on January 2, 2012 by brandonwick

It’s a new year and many altruistic and hopeful people out there, myself included, are longing for world peace. But I temper that aspiration with the understanding that such a utopian state will never occur until we, the human race, can address fundamental societal and geopolitical issues. Namely: Conservation and fair distribution of essential resources, tackling preventable famine and disease; educating a majority of the world’s population (especially women); protecting the fundamental human and civil rights of all people; establishing a credible, functional, and just rule of law on all levels; replacing authoritarian regimes with representative democracies; eliminating extreme poverty with sustainable development initiatives; addressing extreme and growing income inequality; significantly reducing the global arms trade; disavowing political assassinations; confronting religious extremism; and stopping terrorism.

A tall order? Yes, no doubt. But I remain hopeful because I believe that every man-made problem has a man-made solution. And even when natural forces are out of our control, the global community has proven itself capable of rallying to the aid of the most affected people (in recent memory: Japan, Haiti, Pakistan, Thailand, Indonesia, China). Instead of hoping to see all these steps achieved in 2012 — or perhaps even in my lifetime — I’d be happy to see progress made in each of these vital areas and the formation of a global consciousness which prioritizes peace.

In the meantime, let’s aim for something much more manageable, the unnecessary and trivial use of the word “war” when describing something significantly different or much less severe. I was honored when this blog was mentioned and linked to from an article in the Christian Science Monitor last September by Jeremy Shapiro called “Class warfare. War on teachers. War on business. War in America?” Jeremy shows us that the American political discourse has become rife with hyperbole and hostility and that the “war” metaphor is used thrown around quite liberally; often winning media coverage and riling voters. The left accuses the right of a “war” on the poor, the middle class, on the elderly, on public employees; while the right accuses the left of “war” on business, family, values and “class warfare.” “Read the article here.

In 2012, let’s stop needlessly throwing around the word “war.” There are much better ways to make your point than accusing your political/ideological opponents of “war.” Real war is serious, somber, and horrifying business… it cheapens the true nature of war by calling a debate over nativity scene and the separation of church in state a “War on Christmas.” Fox News, take heed.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

It’s Time to Unify Occupy

Posted on October 30, 2011 by brandonwick

It’s been six weeks since the “Occupy Wall St.” movement started at Zuccotti Park in New York when protesters set out to make a statement against the financial state of affairs in this country. After being largely ignored by mass media, the movement is now featured on almost every daily news program. The country is intrigued by Occupy and, naturally, people are trying to understand what these protests are all about.

On October 14th, I headed down to Chapman Park in Portland, Oregon to see for myself what “Occupy Portland” was and how this local manifestation correlated with protests in New York and around the world. Here is a photo montage of what I saw that day. To anyone who is curious, I recommend going to a local Occupy rally, parade, sit in, or camp to talk to the people about their lives and hopes. I also advise watching these videos of respected industry economists Jeffrey Sachs and Paul Krugman.

One of the many things that make this country great is the freedom to assemble and the right of the people to peaceably protest injustices. The labor movement, women’s movement, civil rights movement, environmental movement, and many others were spawned by a small group of dedicated individuals whose call for awareness and righteous action brought others to their cause to battle for a better society. Resistance to change was strong, and the battles were long; but ultimately, progress was made correcting major gaps in our imperfect union.

I believe that the Occupy movement represents a significant, modern economic movement of a similar scale. Why now? Because the income inequality of our modern financial system and its social consequences is reaching a breaking point. Record high and prolonged unemployment rates across the country, a housing and foreclosure crisis, a non-existent recovery, record levels of federal debt, and extreme budget shortfalls at the state levels have convinced people that now is the time for action. Six weeks of sustained protests signal to me that the activists have already challenged the two most formidable enemies to progress — ignorance and apathy. Winter’s arrival will test the meddle of those living in the camps, but I believe a significant core group will carry on the physical occupation; many have no other place to go. Many others will support the movement by periodically joining marches, making donations, and demanding that politicians take Occupy seriously.

The Occupy Wall Street website says the movement is against “greed and corruption of the 1%.” While noble, this mission statement is vague. In order for lasting progress to be made, protesters need to Unify Occupy with a coherent strategy and clear set of progressive demands. When asking the protesters in Portland, what, if they had to name one thing, was the primary issue behind the protests, they mostly said “money in politics.” That’s an issue that will surely come into clear focus as the 2012 presidential race heats up. A tangible precedent to battle in this case may be last year’s Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, No. 08-205 ruling by the Supreme Court (in a 5-4 decision) which says that the government may not ban political spending by corporations in candidate elections.

Greed and corruption are two things which no reasonable person would condone, but are difficult to define. The movement would be well served by communicating which current, legal business and government practices cross a sensible line. In my opinion, a solid set of corruption standards can be found with Transparency International, a German NGO. In their 2010 list of least corrupt countries, the US came in at 22. Not awful, but not an acceptable position for a country who pioneered the ideas of representative, balanced, and transparent governance.

The movement also needs to Unify Occupy on the concept and practice of non-violence, cooperating with the police and city authorities when needed. In the heat of a mass protest — with angry, motivated, and suffering protesters — it’s all too easy for mob psychology take over. This simply must not happen if the movement is to have a future. An example of protest gone wrong is the recent 2011 England Riots, which started to protest a fatal police shooting in Tottenham. A similar series of incidents, even if incited by the police, would be disastrous to Occupy. The burden is upon the protesters to avoid using violence in each and every protest, each and every day. When someone in the protests deviates from nonviolence, Occupy itself needs to bring their actions back into line, not the police.

If occupy truly speaks for the 99%, that includes a very large number of Democrats, Republicans, liberals, and conservatives. Although liberal organizations have been swift to support the movement, Occupy doesn’t break down neatly by party affiliation or the left/right spectrum. Even the arbitrary 1% is not necessarily the enemy. There are a lot of good people in the 1% who are open to fairness, change, and helping the poor. Significant charitable giving by the wealthiest Americans is testament to this. There’s also an interesting new project called the Wall Street 50 that has set out to find 50 conscious financiers who care about people AND profits. These conversations are at the very heart of constructive debate.

It’s the system that allows such an extreme and growing concentration of wealth at the very top, while the majority of the population sees declining standards of living that is the problem. The United States is one of the most unequal societies in modern times, and credible pundits from both sides of the aisle agree that income inequality is hobbling our country.

Another grassroots movement, the Tea Party, was recently successful in raising the country’s awareness of the massive and growing federal debt problem and helped to elect politicians who would not forsake the issue. And as a result, lawmakers from both sides finally sat down to negotiate major cuts to unsustainable government spending while exploring ideas for future deficit reductions. If protesters can Unify Occupy to sound the alarm on our nation’s severe and growing income inequality problem in the same way, Occupy stands to significantly affect our politics, including the 2012 presidential elections.

Those on Twitter, please respond with #UnifyOccupy.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

It goes against all logic…

Posted on August 24, 2011 by brandonwick

The recent ugly battles over the federal debt have prominently brought into clear focus the two ways governments can reduce debt — spending cuts and tax revenue increases. This debate over these two methods is not new and is an integral part of any government’s policy making. As we all know, Republicans in this country traditionally discourage taxation and encourage spending cuts while Democrats prefer the opposite approach.

What’s encouraging about the current debate is that both sides have now finally agreed on the seriousness of our debt problem. In the one month since my last post, each person’s share of the national debt has risen by $830.43 to $46,974.57 per person. While it’s customary that one side of the political aisle will complain about the federal debt while the other party’s presidential administration is racking it up, it’s fairly unique that both parties are recognizing the seriousness of the problem at the same time. It seems that the threat of (and now an actual) downgrading of our credit rating has been enough to spur action to reduce our crushing debt, resulting in a multi-trillion dollar (cuts only) deal.

The Tea Party movement deserves credit for helping to finally get this important debt message across to the country and moving the needle in the national discourse.

What’s unfortunate is that the Tea Party’s influence is largely causing the Republicans to refuse to consider ANY type of tax increase. The president’s “Grand Bargain” at $4 trillion over 10 years that ultimately failed, was significantly larger than the deal that ultimately passed. With a cuts to revenues ratio of 3:1, it appeared to many that Republicans were about to seal a victory, especially when the revenue increases were targeted mostly at closing loop holes on the most wealthy of individuals and corporate interests — not the general public. What did the Republicans get for refusing to consider ANY tax increases? Two trillion dollars less in deficit reduction.

To show how far this blind allegiance to the “no taxes pledge” has gone, the current Republican Presidential candidates indicated across the board that they wouldn’t raise taxes, even if it was a 10:1 spending cuts to tax increases ratio. It goes against all logic. Pundits explaining this unanimous vote have opined that it wasn’t a fair question and that the Republicans wouldn’t believe this many cuts could be true. This was a hypothetical question intended to understand just how far the pledge has gone. Have we really gotten to the point that we can’t participate in this type of abstract thinking? What if the moderators had kept going… 50:1… 100:1? Doing so would have highlighted this absurd stance even more. It was also a strong indicator of just how much power resides on the conservative side of the GOP.

Warren Buffett’s Op-Ed article “Stop Coddling the Super-Rich” has gotten a lot of attention of late on both sides. Hearing a rich businessman say, “tax me” is not a common occurence. Warren pointed out that his effective tax rate, at 17%, is much lower than the average American’s tax rate around 36%. I believe Warren when he says:

“I know well many of the mega-rich and, by and large, they are very decent people. They love America and appreciate the opportunity this country has given them. Many have joined the Giving Pledge, promising to give most of their wealth to philanthropy. Most wouldn’t mind being told to pay more in taxes as well, particularly when so many of their fellow citizens are truly suffering.”

So not only do many rich in this country pay an effective tax rate less than the official top rate of 35%, but overall, the wealth of the richest one percent of the population, the Super-Rich, has skyrocketed over the last 35 years. The graphic below shows that the bottom 90 percent have seen their income rise only by a very small fraction of total growth, while income for the richest 1 percent has grown by roughly 275 percent. But nothing in our tax code has been altered to in light of this massive shift.

I hope Warren’s right and I hope to hear more voices from the Super-Rich stand up for well-targeted taxes on their wealth. If done right, we can help “share the pain” across all our citizens. Granted 50% of our poorer countrymen pay no income taxes at all. There is an opportunity here for additional revenue gains, and a nominal percentage on the lowest tax bracket (say 3%) would preserve the logic that all of us need to sacrifice in this time of great need for the greater good.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 7 Comments

Playing chicken with our solvency, recovery, and standing in the world

Posted on July 16, 2011 by brandonwick

It was hardly a bold prediction in my post on April 13th that although the government shutdown crisis had been averted, the hard work to put the economy in line had just begun. Well, here we are ahead of the August 2nd deadline to raise the federal debt ceiling and still no deal. An agreement would allow the federal government to resume borrowing somewhere north of $100 billion a month to meet its obligations.

According to Wikipedia: “The modern debt limit, in which an aggregate limit was applied to nearly all federal debt, was established in 1939. The Treasury has been authorized by Congress to issue such debt as was needed to fund government operations as long as the total debt (excepting some small special classes) does not exceed a stated ceiling.”

While perhaps a good idea in theory, what’s the point of a ceiling if it constantly gets raised? Since March 1962, the debt ceiling has been raised 74 times, according to the Congressional Research Service. It’s been raised ten times since 2001 alone.

Voting against raising the limit seems to have become a platform for making a political protest vote against an administration’s budget plan. In fact, President Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling in 2006; a vote he now calls “a mistake.” Currently, we have the Republican controlled House of Representatives refusing to raise the ceiling without significant spending cuts.

I believe the Republicans are trying to make a very important point here. For the last several years, the national debt reached a level where it significantly threatens the economy and our future. As of today, each American’s share of the debt is $46,144.14. Making payments on just the interest alone is becoming a major economic burden for our country and our future. We must, collectively, take real steps to start walking back this debt monster. And we must do it NOW, with a significant deal that makes our country start to live within its means.

However, the current stalemate in Washington DC is a political abomination. The fact we’re in even in this situation right now is an embarrassment and glaring sign of government dysfunction. The house minority leader, Mitch McConnell, recently said on the Laura Ingram show said “I refuse to help Barack Obama get reelected by marching Republicans into a position where we have co-ownership of a bad economy.” If the Republicans would go so far as to send our country into default by refusing to let Obama appear to have a victory is absurd.

In any negotiation of government budgets, money out (spending) and money in (taxes) are the two areas of negotiation. It appears to me that Democrats are willing to take some pain and make some painful (and long overdue) cuts to programs popular with their base. But Republicans are refusing to negotiate a tax increase, even highly targeted increases to the wealthy individual and corporate interests based on blind ideology.

It’s a stubborn refusal that is sending our country to the edge of an abyss. It’s unknown full the consequences of a default, but at minimum, interest rates would spike (increasing the debt dramatically), our credit rating reduced, our weak recovery hobbled, and our economic standing with the world forever tarnished.

In times of such raging domestic disagreement, it can help to get some perspective from outside our borders. The new head of the IMF, Christine Lagarde, recently said the following:

“I would hope that there is enough bipartisan intelligence and understanding of the challenge that is ahead of the United States, but also of the rest of the world.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 5 Comments

Civil Politics, Not Civil War

Posted on May 26, 2011 by brandonwick

The sesquicentennial of the first shots fired in the US Civil War on April 12, 1861, has been an opportunity for the nation to reflect on the meaning and legacy of the conflict. There’s no doubt the war still has a profound effect on the North/South dynamic in this country; we still can’t agree on the core cause – slavery or states rights – and symbols like the Confederate Stars and Bars equal racism and oppression to some, while still being flown proudly by others. Culturally, economically, and politically the war’s legacy lives on.

But I’d like to focus this post on what I perceive as the number one lesson learned from the war – that it should never be repeated. The Civil War was the most costly conflict in American history with at least 618,000 American soldiers dead, and many more wounded and left destitute. Vast swaths of our country were destroyed and the suffering inflicted lasted for many decades.

Today, our society is perhaps the most divided that it has been in the 150 years since the conflict. But the fault lines of conflict in modern American society have shifted. No longer is the primary conflict North vs South, but rather political, with strong economic and demographic elements.

The chasm between right and left in this country seems to be widening and deepening; and as it does, the chances of political violence breaking out increase. Throw in hateful and violent rhetoric from extremists of both sides, and you have a volatile and dangerous combination. The assassination attempt on Gabrielle Giffords is a recent, poignant flashpoint in this simmering conflict. But this may just signal a start of greater danger to come.

A recent 60 minutes piece covered the sovereign citizens movement, anti-government U.S. extremists who don’t recognize the authority of the government. They don’t pay taxes and don’t use social security numbers or driver’s licenses. It’s estimated that there are 300,000 sovereign citizens in the U.S. and this number is growing. The group’s leaders have killed in the past and even go so far as promoting the killing of politicians. High unemployment rates and fewer economic opportunities are helping these ranks to grow. As more and more Americans walk away from their mortgages, how much will it take for them to walk away from credit card debt, from courts summons, from all civic responsibilities, and instead embrace a life off the grid in solidarity with other like minded “citizens.”

This political and ideological divide is reminiscent of the civil wars affecting other countries in our hemisphere: Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Colombia, etc. Death tolls from these long lasting conflicts have been equally staggering. A society largely based on the rule of law combined with prosperity generated from the industrial revolution have historically focused US political violence into small skirmishes vs. a larger scale conflict. But our immunity from a conflict based on the political spectrum may perhaps prove to be temporary if we don’t take steps now to avoid it.

Sensible people on both sides, left and right, need to reaffirm right now that political violence, nor violent rhetoric, is acceptable behavior for anyone. To guns rights advocates with bumper stickers insinuating they’ll shoot anyone who tries to enforce gun laws on them – take them off. Anarchists who threaten the rich with confiscation of their wealth or even “kill the rich” – wake up, and bring something constructive to the table.

In an article from Newser on the 150 year anniversary, Ken Burns, the documentarian who knows a thing or two about the conflict, said the following:

“In our less civil society of this moment we are reminded of the full consequences of our failure to compromise in that moment.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Shutdown averted but the work has just begun

Posted on April 13, 2011 by brandonwick

With only a couple hours before the deadline, congressional Republicans and Democrats arrived at a deal to prevent the federal government from shutting down. In this way, the congress succeeded where it had failed in 1995 when the government shut down for five days in a showdown between the Clinton administration and the Newt Gingrich-led House of Representatives. The folks at No Labels commended the agreement as a success in a recent announcement. A shutdown would indeed have been a detriment to all, and the end result of coming to an agreement is a net positive for the country.

President Obama said “This agreement between Democrats and Republicans, on behalf of all Americans, is on a budget that invests in our future while making the largest annual spending cut in our history.” A CNN poll says 58% of Americans support the agreement and 38% disapprove.

And while we pat ourselves on the back for a temporary accommodation in our political process, one has to wonder what took so long. When you know it’s gonna be tough, you get it started with plenty of time, options, and tactics at your disposal to work it through. What’s more, the rhetoric and grandstanding on both sides was unnecessarily devisive; each predictably blaming the impasse on the other. Unfortunately, both sides caved to the pressure to score political points and opted instead for brinkmanship. While pundits are now busy focusing in on who “won,” we should instead ask ourselves “How could we do better?”

CivilPolitics.org offers an analysis of the process discussing the role of social psychology; emphasizing that political power is a zero sum game, but the American economy as a whole is not. It’s also interesting to note the role of positive personal contact between the players for improving the chances of the deal.

With this skirmish in the rearview mirror, but bigger battles looming over the debt ceiling and the 2012 budget on the horizon, now is the time to make adjustments to our approach. We need to put everything on the table and look to balance the sacrifices that we all have to make to put our house in order. There are two ways to tackle a deficit and BOTH need to be considered — reducing spending AND increasing revenue from taxes. Democrats NEED to allow a debate on select elements of entitlements, such as medicare and medicaid, which make up a significant chunk of deficit. Republicans NEED to look at the potential for revenue gains from select tax rate increases for the ultra wealthy as a tool for the greater good.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 1 Comment

US corporate taxes: make it fair and pay what’s fair

Posted on April 1, 2011 by brandonwick

60 Minutes aired a piece last Sunday night with “A look at the world’s new corporate tax havens.” Tax havens are nothing new. Corporate tax dodging has been a poorly kept secret for decades; with large companies from the US and other countries placing their headquarters and sending revenues abroad in search of the lowest tax rates. But what’s new are unprecedented deficits — federal and state. Now more than ever, we need to move our government towards solvency. What’s at stake is $60 billion a year, money meant for America’s coffers currently being sent and kept overseas.

When looking for corporate offices in Zug, Switzerland, all 60 Minutes found were tiny offices, or just mailboxes as evidence of “headquarters” of these large corporations. It’s a complete sham, and one being done in plain sight. To give you an idea of the extent of the problem, the population of Zug is only 26,000. But the number of companies in the area is 30,000, growing at an average rate of 800 a year. Do the math.

So what’s driving the exodus? The big American companies (I’m giving them the honor of this name even though many have largely morphed into international entities with no national affiliation) claim that the US corporate tax rate is too high. These questionable patriots are actually right. At 35% (39% counting state taxes) the US is at the top of the list of developed countries around the world. Only Japan is currently a few tenths of a percentage ahead.

Since 1990, the average corporate tax rate of OECD countries has declined by nearly 16% and now sits at 25.5%. In this same time period, the US rate actually went up! In this year’s State of the Union Address, the President called on the US to “out-educate, out-compete, and out-innovate the rest of the world.” This challenging task will be nearly impossible if we don’t lower this rate much closer to the OECD average. The UK gets it and is now striving to have the “Most Competitive Tax System Among G20.”

Companies that play by the rules are being punished by this high rate, and companies that dodge the taxes are being rewarded by getting away with it. General Electric, often held up as a shining beacon of American business excellence did not pay any federal income taxes in 2010 despite more than $5 billion in profits. By any measure this is completely absurd and some clever folks on Twitter are having a field day.

John Chambers of Cisco Systems needs to be given credit for making an appearance on 60 Minutes and admitting to the practice. Two Texas companies, Transocean and Weatherford, chose to remain in hiding. Cisco has $40 billion “trapped” overseas because if it were brought back, it would be taxed at the full rate. Chambers claims that he wants to bring the money back. How many other CEOs want to do the same, speak up!

It’s estimated that U.S. companies are holding $1.2 trillion overseas for tax reasons. Imagine the impact to our economy if we could bring a significant chunk of that back. But until a change in the status quo, that money won’t budge. Chambers is pushing for a one-time tax break to encourage companies to bring that money back to America, saying “All we’re asking is: Give us a level playing field. Get us close.”

No matter how the current situation happened, or why it’s been allowed to continued for so long, it’s time to lower the corporate rate to a competitive level and to commit to following the rules. Let’s decide, collectively, what that rate should be. Companies need to step forward right now, and declare their commitment to paying their fair share and bringing a significant amount of money back home after action on the rate. Texas Democratic Congressman Lloyd Doggett says “We can’t write a law their lawyers can’t get around.” If that’s the case, let’s try public shaming. Bad PR can move mountains.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Now is the time…

Posted on March 23, 2011 by brandonwick

Over the last decade, and especially the last couple years, the political dialogue in the Unites States has become filled with rancor. We are more divided now, between red and blue states, right and left, and “us vs. them,” than ever before. It would be interesting to explore all the reasons why but I suspect our modern media plays a significant role.

As the situation worsened over the years, I began wondering what I could do about it. I learned about blogging and the power of social media with my marketing job, but never found my calling until I read Russell Bishop’s blog post on 9/27/10 “Are You Part of the Solution or Part of the Problem?” I realized then that by just consuming today’s media, and not joining in the conservation myself, I was missing my opportunity to help shape the debate on today’s critical issues.

Having been inspired by Russell’s call to action, I was equally agitated by a tweet from Ann Coulter on 11/29/10. Commenting on why the “Civility Pledge” by Republican Mark DeMoss and Democrat Lanny Davis was not picking up signatures, Ann shot down the ideas as “gay.” Having a prominent pundit in today’s society use the word “gay” as a putdown and get away with it, boggled my mind. No Ann, you shouldn’t get away with it and I would like you to apologize for your choice of words.

For those not familiar with the civility pledge, here it is: “I will be civil in my public discourse and behavior. I will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them. I will stand against incivility when I see it.” I am very curious as to why only three noble congresspeople, out of 585 people asked to pledge, could agree to be civil. I am also curious as to how many would speak out against the pledge had it been introduced just after the shootings in Tucson on 1/8/11 where a member of congress was shot in the head for her political beliefs. There were many calls then for civility, calls that seemed to resonate for only a few short weeks.

Civility is not a fad. In addition to being “the right thing to do,” treating people with respect is a way to help ensure our debates stays on a constructive path. Our country is facing unprecedented challenges with unemployment, personal health, failing schools, social security, homeland security, environmental degradation, global competitiveness, and the national debt to name a few. We simply cannot afford to waste time, energy, money, and attention with petty negativity and grandstanding.

When deciding to launch Constructive Debate I was further inspired by the Rally To Restore Sanity and the launch of the No Labels organization. In the state of Oregon where I’m from, for the first time in our history, the Oregon House of Representatives is evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats. It will require an effective, constructive, and positive approach to governing in order to bring prosperity to our state. Failure is not an option. In his state of the union address, President Obama called this our generation’s Sputnik Moment. I couldn’t agree more. Constructive Debate, established March 22, 2011.

Thank you to my family, friends, colleagues, and even the people with whom I disagree, for the daily inspiration to play a role in advancing the debate toward positive solutions.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment